Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-18 07:21 UTC

miquido / haiway

Modern Python framework for functional programming and structured concurrency. Developed by Miquido.

PythonMIT★ 10 stars⑂ 2 forkssince Oct 2024View on GitHub ↗

miquido/haiway holds a health index of 83 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (90/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (40/100). It was last updated 5 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

83
overall / 100
Excellent

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.

83
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 70 is calibrated to 83 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

MiquidoOrganization · verified domain
22 followers111 public repossince Aug 2011

This repository is backed by an organization — shared, accountable stewardship that can outlive any single maintainer.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPIhaiway0.59.05,7571605 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

90Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 5 days ago
22.8/36Commit cadence — 33/52 weeks with commits
17.1/18Commit volume — 80 commits in the last year
8/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 10 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
commits_last_year80
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push5
active_weeks_last_year33

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 5 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~13.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tag0.59.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release5
mean_days_between_releases13.3
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?

40Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
15.5/60Stars — 10 stars
0/25Forks — 2 forks
0/15Watchers — 2 watchers
Inputs used
forks2
stars10
watchers2
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized 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_badges5
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
50.1/80Monthly downloads — 5,757 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packageshaiway
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads5,757
unverified_packages_excluded—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Registry dependents. Remaining weights renormalized.

Sustainability & Governance

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

69Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.5/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 98% of commits
6.8/13.5Contributor breadth — 5 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled5
top_contributor_share0.979
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
29.7/30PR acceptance — 234/236 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
4.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 9/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
merged_prs234
open_issues0
closed_issues1
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d8
prs_decided_30d8
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs2
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
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
9.8/25Owner reach — 22 followers of miquido
25/25Track record — 111 public repos, account ~15 yr old
Inputs used
followers22
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginmiquido
public_repos111
account_age_days5,496

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 5 days ago
20/20Version history — 160 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageshaiway
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish5

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

86Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 29 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://www.miquido.com/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 6 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsframework, python, structured-concurrency, asyncio, copy-on-write, immutable
has_wikino
homepagehttps://www.miquido.com/
docs_sitehttps://www.miquido.com/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

57Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
3.8/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 29 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2.2/7.5Code-Review — Found 9/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
0.8/2.5Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
6/7.5Maintained — 10 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 8
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate4.6
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages1
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the pypi:haiway@0.59.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 1 packages. 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.

69Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — AGENTS.md
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt present
0.5/40Legible commit history — 1 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.01
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes7,483
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
11/11Static type checking — src/haiway/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configssrc/haiway/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (src/haiway/py.typed)
54.2/55Manageable file sizes — 2/141 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes150,344
source_files_sampled141
oversized_source_files2

Key facts

10GitHub stars
5contributors
80commits, last 12 months
5days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
0open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 2 ⇿
0Stars
2Forks
75Releases

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.

111222212025-072026-012026-08
Major 0Minor 24Patch 51
OpenSSF Scorecard 4.6 / 10
4.6aggregate

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 · 2026-09-18 07:21 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests29 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3Code-ReviewFound 9/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
8Maintained10 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 8
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPItyping-extensions~=4.16pyproject.toml
All dependencies 87

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 1 direct and 86 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPItyping-extensions4.16.0direct
PyPIannotated-doc0.0.5indirect
PyPIannotated-types0.8.0indirect
PyPIanyio4.15.1indirect
PyPIapplication-file-scanner0.6.4indirect
PyPIapplication-properties0.9.3indirect
PyPIasyncpg0.31.0indirect
PyPIbabel2.18.0indirect
PyPIbackrefs8.0indirect
PyPIbandit1.9.4indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.7.22indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.5.1indirect
PyPIclick8.5.0indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcolumnar1.4.1indirect
PyPIcoverage7.16.0indirect
PyPIfastapi0.141.1indirect
PyPIghp-import2.1.0indirect
PyPIgoogleapis-common-protos1.75.3indirect
PyPIgriffelib2.3.0indirect
PyPIgrpcio1.83.1indirect
PyPIh110.16.0indirect
PyPIhaiway0.59.0indirect
PyPIhttpcore22.12.0indirect
PyPIhttpx22.12.0indirect
PyPIhttpx2-jsfetch1.0indirect
PyPIidna3.19indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPImarkdown3.10.3indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py3.0.0indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.3indirect
PyPImdformat0.7.22indirect
PyPImdformat-gfm0.4.1indirect
PyPImdformat-tables1.0.0indirect
PyPImdit-py-plugins0.6.1indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImergedeep1.3.4indirect
PyPImkdocs1.6.1indirect
PyPImkdocs-autorefs1.4.4indirect
PyPImkdocs-get-deps0.2.2indirect
PyPImkdocs-material9.7.7indirect
PyPImkdocs-material-extensions1.3.1indirect
PyPImkdocstrings0.30.1indirect
PyPImkdocstrings-python2.0.8indirect
PyPInodeenv1.10.0indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-api1.44.0indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-exporter-otlp-proto-common1.44.0indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-exporter-otlp-proto-grpc1.44.0indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-proto1.44.0indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-sdk1.44.0indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-semantic-conventions0.65b0indirect
PyPIpackaging26.3indirect
PyPIpaginate0.5.7indirect
PyPIpathspec1.1.1indirect
PyPIpika1.4.4indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.11.8indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIprotobuf7.36.1indirect
PyPIpy-walk0.3.3indirect
PyPIpydantic2.13.5indirect
PyPIpydantic-core2.46.5indirect
PyPIpygments2.21.0indirect
PyPIpyjson52.0.1indirect
PyPIpymarkdownlnt0.9.39indirect
PyPIpymdown-extensions11.0.2indirect
PyPIpyright1.1.414indirect
PyPIpytest9.1.1indirect
PyPIpytest-asyncio1.4.0indirect
PyPIpytest-cov7.1.0indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIpyyaml-env-tag1.1indirect
PyPIrequests2.34.2indirect
PyPIrich15.0.0indirect
PyPIruff0.16.7indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPIsly0.5indirect
PyPIstarlette1.6.0indirect
PyPIstevedore5.9.1indirect
PyPItomli2.4.1indirect
PyPItoolz1.1.0indirect
PyPItruststore0.10.4indirect
PyPItyping-inspection0.4.4indirect
PyPIurllib32.7.0indirect
PyPIwatchdog6.0.0indirect
PyPIwcwidth0.8.3indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:haiway@0.59.0 pulls in 1 packages, direct and transitive: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct dependencies.

No known advisories affect the assessed dependencies.

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 statistics — PyPI.