Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-21 09:09 UTC

mlua-rs / mlua

High level Lua 5.5/5.4/5.3/5.2/5.1 (including LuaJIT) and Luau bindings to Rust with async/await support

RustCustom license★ 2,914 stars⑂ 220 forkssince Nov 2019View on GitHub ↗

mlua-rs/mlua holds a health index of 84 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (85/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (55/100). It was last updated 17 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

84
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.

84
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 71 is calibrated to 84 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

mlua-rsOrganization
43 followers10 public repossince Jun 2022

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
crates.iomlua0.12.2774,1088717 days agoluascriptingasyncluajitluauapi-bindingsasynchronous
crates.iomlua-sys0.13.0749,8383217 days agoexternal-ffi-bindings
crates.iomlua_derive0.12.2352,8262917 days agoluamlua

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

85Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recency — last push 17 days ago
24.2/36Commit cadence — 35/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 306 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year306
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push17
active_weeks_last_year35
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 26 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 17 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~46.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count26
latest_release_tagv0.12.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release17
mean_days_between_releases46.6
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?

74Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
56.2/60Stars — 2,914 stars
19.5/25Forks — 220 forks
7.1/15Watchers — 20 watchers
Inputs used
forks220
stars2,914
watchers20
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
16.9/22.5License — license file present, not a recognized license
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads — 1,876,772 downloads/month across crates
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesmlua, mlua-sys, mlua_derive
dependents—
ecosystemscrates
total_downloads18,320,870
monthly_downloads1,876,772
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?

59Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
5.5/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 76% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 46 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled46
top_contributor_share0.756
How it's scored
37.5/42Issue resolution — 89% of issues closed
14.7/30PR acceptance — 50/102 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 0/2 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs50
open_issues51
closed_issues423
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d2
issue_closed_ratio0.892
closed_unmerged_prs52
first_time_authors_30d2
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d2
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
11.8/25Owner reach — 43 followers of mlua-rs
16.2/25Track record — 10 public repos, account ~4 yr old
Inputs used
followers43
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginmlua-rs
public_repos10
account_age_days1,573

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 3 package(s) on crates
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 17 days ago
20/20Version history — 87 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesmlua, mlua-sys, mlua_derive
ecosystemscrates
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish17

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

84Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — Cargo.toml ([lints]), mlua-sys/Cargo.toml ([lints]), rustfmt.toml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://docs.rs/mlua
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 9 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsrust, rust-bindings, lua, luajit, async, asynchronous, scripting, luau, wasm
has_wikino
homepage—
docs_sitehttps://docs.rs/mlua
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

56Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
0/2.5CI-Tests — no data
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.2/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SAST — no SAST tool detected
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_evaluated14
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive4
scorecard_aggregate4.5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, CI-Tests, 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
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages1
unassessed_packages34
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 1 resolved dependencies against OSV. 34 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list. 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.

55Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
9.1/40Legible commit history — 17 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.17
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — Cargo.toml, examples/module/Cargo.toml, mlua-sys/Cargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — Cargo.toml ([lints]), mlua-sys/Cargo.toml ([lints]), rustfmt.toml
11/11Static type checking — Rust (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
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
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml, examples/module/Cargo.toml, mlua-sys/Cargo.toml, mlua_derive/Cargo.toml, tests/module/Cargo.toml, tests/module/loader/Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Rust (statically typed)
54.3/55Manageable file sizes — 2/156 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes95,502
source_files_sampled156
oversized_source_files2
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_of—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

2,914GitHub stars
46contributors
306commits, last 12 months
17days since last push
26releases
1bus factor
51open issues
crates.iopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 220 ⇿
0Stars
220Forks
26Releases

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.

0408012016020024021342020-012023-062026-10
Major 0Minor 3Patch 15

Each point covers 7 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.5 / 10
4.5aggregate

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 · 2026-10-21 09:09 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal error: error during branchesHandler.setup: internal error: some github tokens can't read classic branch protection rules: https://github.com/ossf/scorecard-action/blob/main/docs/authentication/fine-grained-auth-token.md
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
10Contributorsproject has 4 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
9Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTno SAST tool detected
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 18
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.iomlua_derive=0.12.2Cargo.toml
crates.iobstr1.0Cargo.toml
crates.ioeither1.0Cargo.toml
crates.ionum-traits0.2.14Cargo.toml
crates.iorustc-hash2.0Cargo.toml
crates.iofutures-util0.3Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde1.0Cargo.toml
crates.ioerased-serde0.4Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde-value0.7Cargo.toml
crates.ioparking_lot0.12Cargo.toml
crates.ioanyhow1.0Cargo.toml
crates.ioinventory0.3Cargo.toml
crates.iolibc0.2Cargo.toml
crates.ioffi0.13.0Cargo.toml
crates.iolibc0.2mlua-sys/Cargo.toml
crates.ioquote1.0mlua_derive/Cargo.toml
crates.ioproc-macro21.0mlua_derive/Cargo.toml
crates.iosyn2.0mlua_derive/Cargo.toml
All dependencies 35

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 16 direct and 19 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
crates.ioanyhow—direct
crates.iobstr—direct
crates.ioeither—direct
crates.ioerased-serde—direct
crates.iofutures-util—direct
crates.ioinventory—direct
crates.iolibc—direct
crates.iomlua_derive0.12.2direct
crates.ionum-traits—direct
crates.ioparking_lot—direct
crates.ioproc-macro2—direct
crates.ioquote—direct
crates.iorustc-hash—direct
crates.ioserde—direct
crates.ioserde-value—direct
crates.iosyn—direct
crates.iocc—indirect
crates.iocfg-if—indirect
crates.iocriterion—indirect
crates.iohttp-body-util—indirect
crates.iohyper—indirect
crates.iohyper-util—indirect
crates.iolua-src—indirect
crates.ioluajit-src—indirect
crates.ioluau0-src—indirect
crates.iomaplit—indirect
crates.iomlua-sys—indirect
crates.iopkg-config—indirect
crates.ioreqwest—indirect
crates.iorustyline—indirect
crates.ioserde_json—indirect
crates.iostatic_assertions—indirect
crates.iotempfile—indirect
crates.iotokio—indirect
crates.iotrybuild—indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 1 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 34 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

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 — crates.io.