Public record
Software health reportschema 0.11.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-17 06:42 UTC

nerves-project / nerves_pack

Initialization setup for Nerves devices

ElixirCustom license★ 50 stars⑂ 6 forkssince Nov 2019View on GitHub ↗

nerves-project/nerves_pack holds a health index of 54 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (76/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (11/100). It was last updated 41 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

54
overall / 100
Moderate

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.

54
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 53 is calibrated to 54 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Nerves ProjectOrganization
203 followers51 public repossince Feb 2012

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Hexnerves_pack0.7.24,1251741 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

50Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recencylast push 41 days ago
1.4/36Commit cadence2/52 weeks with commits
5.4/18Commit volume3 commits in the last year
2/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained3 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
commits_last_year3
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push41
active_weeks_last_year2
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases17 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 41 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~238.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count17
latest_release_tagv0.7.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release41
mean_days_between_releases238.4
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?

59Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
27.4/60Stars50 stars
5.8/25Forks6 forks
1.7/15Watchers3 watchers
Inputs used
forks6
stars50
watchers3
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

87Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
16.9/22.5Licenselicense file present, not a recognized license
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
7.2/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseno
readme_badges
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateyes
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
48.2/80Monthly downloads4,125 downloads/month across hex
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesnerves_pack
dependents
ecosystemshex
total_downloads255,830
monthly_downloads4,125
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?

76Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
9/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 60% of commits
12.2/13.5Contributor breadth9 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 9 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled9
top_contributor_share0.599
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution100% of issues closed
27.6/30PR acceptance216/235 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
7.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 4/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
merged_prs216
open_issues0
closed_issues7
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs19
first_time_authors_30d
first_time_prs_merged_30d
first_time_prs_decided_30d
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
16.6/25Owner reach203 followers of nerves-project
24.5/25Track record51 public repos, account ~14 yr old
Inputs used
followers203
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginnerves-project
public_repos51
account_age_days5,278
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on hex
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 41 days ago
20/20Version history17 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesnerves_pack
ecosystemshex
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish41

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

25At Risk · 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-Tests2 out of 27 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsno
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

60Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics2 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsnerves, vintage-net
has_wikiyes
homepage
docs_site
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

60Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
0/2.5CI-Tests2 out of 27 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3.8/7.5Code-ReviewFound 4/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 9 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
1.5/7.5Maintained3 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesno data
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsno data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated12
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive6
scorecard_aggregate6
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.

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.

11Critical · 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 historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
0/8Automated maintenanceno data
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesno data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance, OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codeElixir without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/2 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageElixir
largest_source_bytes1,630
source_files_sampled2
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

50GitHub stars
9contributors
3commits, last 12 months
41days since last push
17releases
1bus factor
0open issues
Hexpackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.0 / 10
6.0aggregate

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 · 2026-07-17 06:42 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
0CI-Tests2 out of 27 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
5Code-ReviewFound 4/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
10Contributorsproject has 9 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
2Maintained3 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 11
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Hexnerves_ssh> 0.0.0mix.exs
Hexnerves_runtime> 0.0.0mix.exs
Hexnerves_time> 0.0.0mix.exs
Hexnerves_motd> 0.0.0mix.exs
Hexring_logger> 0.0.0mix.exs
Hexvintage_net> 0.0.0mix.exs
Hexvintage_net_direct> 0.0.0mix.exs
Hexvintage_net_ethernet> 0.0.0mix.exs
Hexvintage_net_wifi> 0.0.0mix.exs
Hexmdns_lite> 0.0.0mix.exs
Hexex_doc~> 0.22mix.exs
All dependencies 0

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 0 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
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 v0.11.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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