Public record
Software health reportschema 0.16.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-20 21:14 UTC

nextest-rs / quick-junit

A serializer and deserializer for JUnit reports, used by cargo-nextest

RustApache-2.0★ 12 stars⑂ 4 forkssince Apr 2024View on GitHub ↗

nextest-rs/quick-junit holds a health index of 63 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Vitality (87/100) and lowest on Security (25/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

63
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.

63
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 59 is calibrated to 63 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

nextest-rsOrganization
41 followers21 public repossince Feb 2022

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

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

87Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
21.5/36Commit cadence31/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume183 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintainedno data
Inputs used
commits_last_year183
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year31
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases9 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 0 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~104.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count9
latest_release_tagquick-junit-0.7.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases104.1

Community & Adoption

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

51Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
16.9/60Stars12 stars
4/25Forks4 forks
0/15Watchers1 watchers
Inputs used
forks4
stars12
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

58Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
4.8/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 78% of commits
12.2/13.5Contributor breadth9 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsno data
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled9
top_contributor_share0.785
How it's scored
25.2/42Issue resolution60% of issues closed
29.7/30PR acceptance586/592 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Reviewno data
Inputs used
merged_prs586
open_issues2
closed_issues3
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.6
closed_unmerged_prs6
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
11.7/25Owner reach41 followers of nextest-rs
18.7/25Track record21 public repos, account ~4 yr old
Inputs used
followers41
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginnextest-rs
public_repos21
account_age_days1,623
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

66Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Testsno data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://docs.rs/quick-junit
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics6 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsjunit, rust, xml, xunit, nextest, testing
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://docs.rs/quick-junit
docs_sitehttps://docs.rs/quick-junit
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

25At Risk · 16% of overall
How it's scored
0/30Security policy (SECURITY.md)
0/25Dependabot config
25/25Dependency lockfilesCargo.lock
0/20CodeQL workflow
Inputs used
sourcefile_signals
lockfilesCargo.lock
manifestsCargo.toml, fuzz/Cargo.toml
has_codeql_workflowno
has_security_policyno
has_dependabot_configno

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.

58Moderate · 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
18/18One-command bootstrapJustfile
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingRust (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
0/8Automated maintenanceno data
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesno data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesCargo.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesJustfile
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. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeRust (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/17 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes47,875
source_files_sampled17
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

12GitHub stars
9contributors
183commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
9releases
1bus factor
2open issues
crates.iopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Could not fetch crates package 'quick-junit-fuzz' from its registry
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository
  • OpenSSF Scorecard timed out after 240s; skipping Scorecard checks

More detail

Direct dependencies 2
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.iolibfuzzer-sys0.4fuzz/Cargo.toml
crates.ioquick-junitfuzz/Cargo.toml
All dependencies not collected

The resolved dependency set could not be collected for this report: GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

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 v0.16.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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