Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-14 20:58 UTC

mne-tools / mne-python

MNE: Magnetoencephalography (MEG) and Electroencephalography (EEG) in Python

PythonBSD-3-Clause★ 3,515 stars⑂ 1,591 forkssince Jan 2011View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

mne-tools/mne-python holds a health index of 98 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Vitality (97/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (72/100). It was last updated today. 3 contributors account for most of its recent work.

98
overall / 100
Exceptional

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.

98
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 88 is calibrated to 98 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

321 followers50 public repossince Jan 2011

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

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

97Exceptional · 21% of overall

Development activity

100Exceptional
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
36/36Commit cadence52/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume585 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 20 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year585
human_commit_share0.93
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year52
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases67 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 3 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~70.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count67
latest_release_tagv1.13.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release3
mean_days_between_releases70.2
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?

93Exceptional · 17% of overall
How it's scored
57.5/60Stars3,515 stars
25/25Forks1,591 forks
10.6/15Watchers83 watchers
Inputs used
forks1,591
stars3,515
watchers83
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (BSD-3-Clause)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
74.4/80Monthly downloads379,448 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesmne
dependents
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads
monthly_downloads379,448
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?

82Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
36/54Bus factor3 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
16.2/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 28% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth97 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 61 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor3
contributors_sampled97
top_contributor_share0.278
How it's scored
37.9/42Issue resolution90% of issues closed
26.1/30PR acceptance7,788/8,962 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance3/3 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
6/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 12/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
merged_prs7,788
open_issues509
closed_issues4,693
prs_merged_7d25
prs_decided_7d25
prs_merged_30d54
prs_decided_30d54
issue_closed_ratio0.902
closed_unmerged_prs1,174
first_time_authors_30d3
first_time_prs_merged_30d3
first_time_prs_decided_30d3
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domain
18/25Owner reach321 followers of mne-tools
24.4/25Track record50 public repos, account ~15 yr old
Inputs used
followers321
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginmne-tools
public_repos50
account_age_days5,710

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 3 days ago
20/20Version history89 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesmne
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish3

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

95Exceptional · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows9 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configpyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
18/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests18 out of 19 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://mne.tools
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics12 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicspython, neuroscience, electroencephalography, magnetoencephalography, electrocorticography, machine-learning, statistics, visualization, eeg, meg, ecog, neuroimaging
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://mne.tools
docs_sitehttps://mne.tools
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

78Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
2.2/2.5CI-Tests18 out of 19 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
1.8/2.5CII-Best-Practicesbadge detected: Silver
3/7.5Code-ReviewFound 12/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 61 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 20 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
3.5/5SASTSAST tool detected but not run on all commits
5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate7.3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriesno indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages24
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:mne@1.13.2 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 24 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.

72Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
39.6/40Legible commit history69 of 93 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.742
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes15,146
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapMakefile, doc/Makefile, tools/dev/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format configpyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance2 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile, doc/Makefile, tools/dev/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.02
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePython without a type-check config
52/55Manageable file sizes51/932 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes226,126
source_files_sampled932
oversized_source_files51
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplesexamples, sample
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples, sample
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

3,515GitHub stars
97contributors
585commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
67releases
3bus factor
509open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • First-time contributor figures cover 12 of 22 authors (cap 12)

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 1,591 ⇿
0Stars
1,591Forks
50Releases

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.

Only the most recent history is shown — this repository exceeds the collection window, so the earliest history is not captured.

4006008001,0001,2001,4001,6001,591132019-102023-032026-09
Major 1Minor 17Patch 32

Each point covers 7 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.3 / 10
7.3aggregate

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 · 2026-09-14 20:58 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
9CI-Tests18 out of 19 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
7CII-Best-Practicesbadge detected: Silver
4Code-ReviewFound 12/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
10Contributorsproject has 61 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 20 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
7SASTSAST tool detected but not run on all commits
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 9
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIdecorator>= 5.1pyproject.toml
PyPIjinja2>= 3.1pyproject.toml
PyPIlazy_loader>= 0.3pyproject.toml
PyPImatplotlib>= 3.9pyproject.toml
PyPInumpy>= 2.1, < 3pyproject.toml
PyPIpackagingpyproject.toml
PyPIpooch>= 1.5pyproject.toml
PyPIscipy>= 1.14pyproject.toml
PyPItqdm>= 4.66pyproject.toml
All dependencies 69

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 8 direct and 61 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIdecoratordirect
PyPIjinja2direct
PyPIlazy-loaderdirect
PyPImatplotlibdirect
PyPInumpydirect
PyPIpoochdirect
PyPIscipydirect
PyPItqdmdirect
PyPIantioindirect
PyPIcurryreaderindirect
PyPIdipyindirect
PyPIdocutilsindirect
PyPIedfioindirect
PyPIfilelockindirect
PyPIh5ioindirect
PyPIh5pyindirect
PyPIhatchlingindirect
PyPIimageioindirect
PyPIimageio-ffmpegindirect
PyPIintersphinx-registryindirect
PyPIipythonindirect
PyPIjamicaindirect
PyPIjoblibindirect
PyPIjupyterlite-pyodide-kernelindirect
PyPIjupyterlite-sphinxindirect
PyPImemory-profilerindirect
PyPImffpyindirect
PyPImne-qt-browserindirect
PyPInibabelindirect
PyPInilearnindirect
PyPInitimeindirect
PyPInumbaindirect
PyPInumpydocindirect
PyPIopenmeegindirect
PyPIopenneuro-pyindirect
PyPIpandasindirect
PyPIpillowindirect
PyPIpipindirect
PyPIpydata-sphinx-themeindirect
PyPIpygmentsindirect
PyPIpyobjc-framework-cocoaindirect
PyPIpyqt6indirect
PyPIpyqt6-qt6indirect
PyPIpyside6indirect
PyPIpytestindirect
PyPIpytest-covindirect
PyPIpytest-qtindirect
PyPIpytest-timeoutindirect
PyPIpytest-xdistindirect
PyPIpython-picardindirect
PyPIpyvistaindirect
PyPIpyvista-jsindirect
PyPIpyvistaqtindirect
PyPIpyzmqindirect
PyPIqdarkstyleindirect
PyPIrcssminindirect
PyPIrefleakindirect
PyPIruffindirect
PyPIscikit-learnindirect
PyPIseabornindirect
PyPIseleniumindirect
PyPIsphinxindirect
PyPIsphinx-galleryindirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-bibtexindirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-towncrierindirect
PyPIstatsmodelsindirect
PyPItrameindirect
PyPItrame-vuetifyindirect
PyPIvtkindirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:mne@1.13.2 pulls in 24 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 statisticsPyPI.