Public record
Software health reportschema 0.15.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-19 12:59 UTC

nodejs / branch-diff

A tool to list print the commits on one git branch that are not on another using loose comparison

JavaScriptNo license detected★ 53 stars⑂ 21 forkssince Sep 2015View on GitHub ↗

nodejs/branch-diff holds a health index of 65 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (78/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (13/100). It was last updated 3 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

65
overall / 100
Good

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.

65
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 60 is calibrated to 65 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Node.jsOrganization
16,194 followers231 public repossince Nov 2014

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
npmbranch-diff3.1.65,017513 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

72Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 3 days ago
6.9/36Commit cadence10/52 weeks with commits
11.1/18Commit volume16 commits in the last year
5/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained6 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
commits_last_year16
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push3
active_weeks_last_year10
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases27 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 3 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~105.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count27
latest_release_tagv3.1.6
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release3
mean_days_between_releases105.1
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?

54Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
27.8/60Stars53 stars
10.8/25Forks21 forks
5.8/15Watchers12 watchers
Inputs used
forks21
stars53
watchers12
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
0/22.5Licenseno license file detected
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseno
readme_badges
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
49.3/80Monthly downloads5,017 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesbranch-diff
dependents
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads
monthly_downloads5,017
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?

78Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
14.8/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 34% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth15 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 12 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled15
top_contributor_share0.343
How it's scored
24/42Issue resolution57% of issues closed
20.2/30PR acceptance54/80 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
3/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 3/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
merged_prs54
open_issues3
closed_issues4
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.571
closed_unmerged_prs26
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
25/25Owner reach16,194 followers of nodejs
25/25Track record231 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers16,194
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginnodejs
public_repos231
account_age_days4,253
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 npm
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 3 days ago
20/20Version history51 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesbranch-diff
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish3

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

44Weak · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows1 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
10/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests11 out of 20 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
has_ciyes
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
topicsnodejs, node
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?

57Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
1.2/2.5CI-Tests11 out of 20 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1.5/7.5Code-ReviewFound 3/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 12 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
0/2.5Licenselicense file not detected
3.8/7.5Maintained6 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
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-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_aggregate5.7
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Signed-Releases. 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.

13Critical · 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
5/8Automated maintenancedependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
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_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codeJavaScript without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/1 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes5,370
source_files_sampled1
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

53GitHub stars
15contributors
16commits, last 12 months
3days since last push
27releases
2bus factor
3open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.7 / 10
5.7aggregate

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 · 2026-07-19 12:59 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
5CI-Tests11 out of 20 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2Code-ReviewFound 3/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
10Contributorsproject has 12 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
0Licenselicense file not detected
5Maintained6 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 6
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npmchangelog-maker^4.0.0package.json
npmcommit-stream^2.0.1package.json
npmgitexec^2.0.1package.json
npmminimist^1.2.8package.json
npmpkg-to-id^0.0.3package.json
npmsplit2^4.2.0package.json
All dependencies 7

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 6 direct and 1 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npmchangelog-maker^4.0.0direct
npmcommit-stream^2.0.1direct
npmgitexec^2.0.1direct
npmminimist^1.2.8direct
npmpkg-to-id^0.0.3direct
npmsplit2^4.2.0direct
npmstandard^17.0.0indirect
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 v0.15.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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