Public record
Software health reportschema 0.14.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-18 17:11 UTC

noritada / grib-rs

GRIB format parser & writer for Rust

RustApache-2.0★ 82 stars⑂ 15 forkssince May 2020View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

noritada/grib-rs holds a health index of 77 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (88/100) and lowest on Security (42/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

77
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.

77
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 66 is calibrated to 77 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Noritada KobayashiPersonal account
65 followers74 public repossince Aug 2008@weathernews

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
crates.iogrib0.16.03,748410 days agogribmeteorologyweatherscience
crates.iogrib-cli0.16.050330 days agogribmeteorologyweatherscience
crates.iogrib-build0.4.43,6248295 days ago
crates.iogrib-template-derive0.1.63,365782 days agogribmeteorologyweatherscience
crates.iogrib-template-helpers0.1.43,374582 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

88Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
23.5/36Commit cadence34/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume420 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year420
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year34
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases41 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recencylatest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~15.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count41
latest_release_tagv0.16.0
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases15.8
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
31/60Stars82 stars
9.6/25Forks15 forks
3.3/15Watchers5 watchers
Inputs used
forks15
stars82
watchers5
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code 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_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
55.3/80Monthly downloads14,161 downloads/month across crates
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesgrib, grib-cli, grib-build, grib-template-derive, grib-template-helpers
dependents
ecosystemscrates
total_downloads146,776
monthly_downloads14,161
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?

61Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.6/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 97% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth10 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled10
top_contributor_share0.974
How it's scored
32.7/42Issue resolution78% of issues closed
29.8/30PR acceptance144/145 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
1.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 3/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
merged_prs144
open_issues10
closed_issues35
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.778
closed_unmerged_prs1
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
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
13.1/25Owner reach65 followers of noritada
25/25Track record74 public repos, account ~17 yr old
Inputs used
followers65
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginnoritada
public_repos74
account_age_days6,545
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable5 package(s) on crates
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history41 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesgrib, grib-cli, grib-build, grib-template-derive, grib-template-helpers
ecosystemscrates
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

81Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests5 out of 5 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://docs.rs/grib
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics5 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsrust, grib, grib2, meteorology, weather
has_wikiyes
homepage
docs_sitehttps://docs.rs/grib
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

42Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests5 out of 5 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0.8/7.5Code-ReviewFound 3/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
0.8/2.5Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
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
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not 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_aggregate4.2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, 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.

46Weak · 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
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingRust (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
0/8Automated maintenanceno data
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency 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_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 sizes0/112 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes54,120
source_files_sampled112
oversized_source_files0
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
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

82GitHub stars
10contributors
420commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
41releases
1bus factor
10open issues
crates.iopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Could not fetch crates package 'grib-codegen' from its registry
  • Could not fetch crates package 'compat-test' from its registry
  • Could not fetch crates package 'grib-demo' from its registry

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.2 / 10
4.2aggregate

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 · 2026-07-18 17:11 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests5 out of 5 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1Code-ReviewFound 3/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense 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
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
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 34
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.iochrono0.4.34Cargo.toml
crates.iogrib-template-derive0.1.6Cargo.toml
crates.iogrib-template-helpers0.1.4Cargo.toml
crates.ionum0.4Cargo.toml
crates.ionum_enum0.7Cargo.toml
crates.ioproj0.31Cargo.toml
crates.iolibaec-sys0.1.1Cargo.toml
crates.iohayro-jpeg20000.4Cargo.toml
crates.ioopenjpeg-sys1.0.5Cargo.toml
crates.iopng0.18Cargo.toml
crates.iorust-aec0.1Cargo.toml
crates.ioanyhow1cli/Cargo.toml
crates.ioclap4.1cli/Cargo.toml
crates.ioclap_complete4cli/Cargo.toml
crates.ioconsole0.16cli/Cargo.toml
crates.ioregex1.8cli/Cargo.toml
crates.ioproc-macro21codegen/Cargo.toml
crates.ioquote1codegen/Cargo.toml
crates.iosyn2codegen/Cargo.toml
crates.ioeccodes-sys0.6.0compat-test/Cargo.toml
crates.iogrib=0.13.5compat-test/Cargo.toml
crates.iotempfile3compat-test/Cargo.toml
crates.iogloo-file0.4demo/Cargo.toml
crates.iogrib0.16.0demo/Cargo.toml
crates.iowasm-bindgen0.2demo/Cargo.toml
crates.iowasm-bindgen-futures0.4demo/Cargo.toml
crates.ioweb-sys0.3demo/Cargo.toml
crates.ioyew0.23demo/Cargo.toml
crates.iocsv1gen/Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde1gen/Cargo.toml
crates.iogrib-template-helpers=0.1.4grib-template-derive/Cargo.toml
crates.ioproc-macro21grib-template-derive/Cargo.toml
crates.ioquote1grib-template-derive/Cargo.toml
crates.iosyn2grib-template-derive/Cargo.toml
All dependencies 41

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 32 direct and 9 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
crates.ioanyhowdirect
crates.iochronodirect
crates.ioclapdirect
crates.ioclap_completedirect
crates.ioconsoledirect
crates.iocsvdirect
crates.ioeccodes-sysdirect
crates.iogloo-filedirect
crates.iogribdirect
crates.iogrib0.13.5direct
crates.iogrib0.16.0direct
crates.iogrib-template-derivedirect
crates.iogrib-template-helpersdirect
crates.iogrib-template-helpers0.1.4direct
crates.iohayro-jpeg2000direct
crates.iolibaec-sysdirect
crates.ionumdirect
crates.ionum_enumdirect
crates.ioopenjpeg-sysdirect
crates.iopngdirect
crates.ioproc-macro2direct
crates.ioprojdirect
crates.ioquotedirect
crates.ioregexdirect
crates.iorust-aecdirect
crates.ioserdedirect
crates.iosyndirect
crates.iotempfiledirect
crates.iowasm-bindgendirect
crates.iowasm-bindgen-futuresdirect
crates.ioweb-sysdirect
crates.ioyewdirect
crates.ioassert_cmdindirect
crates.ioflate2indirect
crates.iogrib-buildindirect
crates.iopagerindirect
crates.iopredicatesindirect
crates.iotoml_editindirect
crates.iotrybuildindirect
crates.iowhichindirect
crates.ioxz2indirect
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 v0.14.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticscrates.io.