Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-23 03:34 UTC

minhhungit / AppCfg.Net

Type-safe, easy and power configuration framework for .NET developers

C#MIT★ 12 stars⑂ 6 forkssince Apr 2018View on GitHub ↗

minhhungit/AppCfg.Net holds a health index of 14 out of 100, placing it in the Critical band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (41/100) and lowest on Vitality (1/100). It was last updated 1385 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

14
overall / 100
Critical

Software health index

Metrics are grouped into weighted categories on one standardized 1–100 scale. Overall starts as their weighted mean, calibrated against the distribution of the public record so bands carry percentile meaning; when public evidence triggers the High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy, the rating is adjusted and receives an At Risk ceiling of 34.

14
Exceptional93-100The record's top tier (≈ top 5%); essentially all checked criteria met
Excellent80-92Strong across the board; minor gaps
Good65-79Healthy; gaps are limited and manageable
Moderate50-64Acceptable with notable gaps; review recommended
Weak35-49Material weaknesses across several areas
At Risk20-34Significant weaknesses; adoption warrants caution
Critical1-19Severe problems (abandoned, single-maintainer, no hygiene)
VitalityCommunity &AdoptionSustainability &GovernanceEngineeringQualitySecurityAI Readiness

Score profile

Each axis is a category. The shape matters more than the average — a healthy subject fills the whole shape, while a spike-and-crater profile means strength in one dimension is masking risk in another.

The weighted overall 29 is calibrated to 23 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

JinPersonal account
127 followers462 public repossince Sep 2012

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
NuGetAppCfg.Netpoints to another repo — not scored2.2.0-170 days agoconfigurationappsettingjsondotnetcsharpnetstandard20dotnetcore

Metrics by category

Vitality

Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping?

1Critical · 21% of overall
How it's scored
0/36Push recencylast push 1,385 days ago
0/36Commit cadence0/52 weeks with commits
0/18Commit volume0 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year0
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push1,385
active_weeks_last_year0
How it's scored
0/27Ships releasesno releases published
0/36Release recencyno releases
0/27Release cadenceno releases
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Community & Adoption

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?

37Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
16.9/60Stars12 stars
5.8/25Forks6 forks
2.7/15Watchers4 watchers
Inputs used
forks6
stars12
watchers4
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges2
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesci.appveyor.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep?

41Weak · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth1 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution100% of issues closed
0/30PR acceptance0/3 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs0
open_issues0
closed_issues3
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs3
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
15.1/25Owner reach127 followers of minhhungit
25/25Track record462 public repos, account ~14 yr old
Inputs used
followers127
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginminhhungit
public_repos462
account_age_days5,131
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

35Weak · 19% of overall
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Testsno data
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsno
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Documentation

85Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics8 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsconfiguration, appsetting, json, dotnet, csharp, netstandard20, dotnetcore, appcfg-net
has_wikiyes
homepage
docs_site
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, without unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure?

32At Risk · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5CI-Testsno data
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
1.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
0/7.5Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesno data
0/5SASTno SAST tool detected
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsno data
6.8/7.5Vulnerabilities1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated12
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive6
scorecard_aggregate2.7
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
9/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories2 affected: Newtonsoft.Json 11.0.2 (high 7.5), System.Data.SqlClient 4.4.3 (high 8.7)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
28.5/40No advisories left outstanding2 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 1,553 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories3
affected_packages2
assessed_packages6
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityhigh 2
direct_affected_packages2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 6 resolved dependencies against OSV. This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so the repository dependency graph was assessed instead. That graph mixes development and test pins with shipped dependencies, so only the declared runtime dependencies are scored; transitive findings are reported as context and excluded from the score. Reachability is not analyzed.

AI Readiness

How well is the repo equipped to be developed and maintained with AI coding agents? Carries a deliberately small weight (4%): agent tooling is a real maintenance signal, but a repository with none can still reach 100/100.

30At Risk · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history0 of 97 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrapAppCfg.Test/AppCfg.Test.csproj, AppCfg/AppCfg.csproj, AppCfgDemo/AppCfgDemo.csproj (toolchain convention, no task runner)
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingC# (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 97
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesno data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsAppCfg.Test/AppCfg.Test.csproj, AppCfg/AppCfg.csproj, AppCfgDemo/AppCfgDemo.csproj, AppCfgDemoMssql/AppCfgDemoMssql.csproj, AppCfgDemoRedis/AppCfgDemoRedis.csproj
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeC# (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/60 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageC#
largest_source_bytes5,794
source_files_sampled60
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

12GitHub stars
1contributors
0commits, last 12 months
1,385days since last push
0releases
1bus factor
0open issues
NuGetpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • nuget package 'AppCfg.Net' points at a different repository (https://github.com/minhhungit/AppCfg); excluded from ecosystem scoring

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 6 ⇿
0Stars
6Forks

When each star and fork was added, collected from GitHub and bucketed by day. Cumulative growth sits directly above the daily additions it is made of, so the two read against each other: steady organic accretion looks nothing like an abrupt, short-lived burst. Where that difference is measurable, it is reported as growth authenticity.

123456612019-022020-072021-12

Each point covers 3 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 2.7 / 10
2.7aggregate

Independent, tool-agnostic security assessment from the open-source OpenSSF Scorecard. Each check rewards a security practice, not a specific vendor's tool. Checks Scorecard could not determine are marked n/a and excluded from the security score (never counted as zero).Scorecard v5.5.0 · 2026-09-23 03:33 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
n/aCI-Testsno pull request found
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTno SAST tool detected
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
9Vulnerabilities1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 4
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
NuGetNewtonsoft.Json11.0.2AppCfg/AppCfg.csproj
NuGetSystem.Configuration.ConfigurationManager4.4.1AppCfg/AppCfg.csproj
NuGetSystem.Data.SqlClient4.4.3AppCfg/AppCfg.csproj
NuGetSystem.Reflection.Emit4.3.0AppCfg/AppCfg.csproj
All dependencies 6

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 4 direct and 2 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
NuGetNewtonsoft.Json11.0.2direct
NuGetSystem.Configuration.ConfigurationManager4.4.1direct
NuGetSystem.Data.SqlClient4.4.3direct
NuGetSystem.Reflection.Emit4.3.0direct
NuGetNUnit3.10.1indirect
NuGetNUnit3TestAdapter3.10.0indirect
Dependency advisories 2

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 6 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 2 carry known advisories, of which 2 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
Newtonsoft.Json11.0.2directhigh113.0.1
System.Data.SqlClient4.4.3directhigh25.1.3

An advisory means the version recorded in the dependency graph falls inside an advisory’s affected range. Reachability is not analysed, and the graph includes development and test pins — a finding may concern tooling rather than shipped software.

Raw JSON report machine-readable

Feedback

Spotted something off in this report, or have thoughts to share? Wrong measurements, missed tooling, ideas, questions — anything is welcome. Every message is read and gets a response.

The message is kept through sign-in.

Scores are signals, not warranties. They reflect publicly visible practices on GitHub — not a code audit, and not a security guarantee.

Missing data is excluded and weights renormalized, never scored as zero. Methodology is versioned and open: metrics v2.10.0, schema v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticsNuGet.