Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-06 10:38 UTC

open-feature / java-sdk

Java implementation of the OpenFeature SDK

JavaApache-2.0★ 128 stars⑂ 60 forkssince Apr 2022View on GitHub ↗

open-feature/java-sdk holds a health index of 97 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Vitality (99/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (60/100). It was last updated 1 day ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

97
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.

97
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 85 is calibrated to 97 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

OpenFeatureOrganization · verified domain
1,527 followers60 public repossince Feb 2022

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Mavendev.openfeature:sdk1.22.1-499 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

99Exceptional · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 1 days ago
33.9/36Commit cadence49/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume412 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 4 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year412
human_commit_share0.27
days_since_last_push1
active_weeks_last_year49

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases57 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 9 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~36.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count57
latest_release_tagv1.22.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release9
mean_days_between_releases36.1
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?

71Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
34.1/60Stars128 stars
14.8/25Forks60 forks
3.3/15Watchers5 watchers
Inputs used
forks60
stars128
watchers5
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 (Apache-2.0)
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_badges4
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesbestpractices.coreinfrastructure.org, codecov.io, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes

Sustainability & Governance

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

86Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
13.5/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 40% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth43 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 9 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled43
top_contributor_share0.4
How it's scored
38.2/42Issue resolution91% of issues closed
29.2/30PR acceptance1,816/1,868 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
15/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
Inputs used
merged_prs1,816
open_issues13
closed_issues132
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d2
prs_decided_30d2
issue_closed_ratio0.91
closed_unmerged_prs52
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
20/20Verified domain
22.9/25Owner reach1,527 followers of open-feature
22.1/25Track record60 public repos, account ~4 yr old
Inputs used
followers1,527
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginopen-feature
public_repos60
account_age_days1,667

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on maven
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 9 days ago
20/20Version history49 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesdev.openfeature:sdk
ecosystemsmaven
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish9

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

80Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows6 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://openfeature.dev
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics3 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsjava, sdk, openfeature
has_wikino
homepagehttps://openfeature.dev
docs_sitehttps://openfeature.dev
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

93Exceptional · 16% of overall

Security posture

91Excellent
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
1.2/2.5CII-Best-Practicesbadge detected: Passing
7.5/7.5Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 9 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 4 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
3/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6
5/5SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
7.5/7.5Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate9.1
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_packages1
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 maven:dev.openfeature:sdk@1.22.1 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 1 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.

60Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history27 of 27 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share1
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrappom.xml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingJava (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance73 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestspom.xml
dependency_bot_commit_share0.73
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeJava (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/186 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJava
largest_source_bytes40,011
source_files_sampled186
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

128GitHub stars
43contributors
412commits, last 12 months
1days since last push
57releases
2bus factor
13open issues
Mavenpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 60 ⇿
0Stars
60Forks
56Releases

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.

01020304050605922022-042024-062026-08
Major 1Minor 23Patch 29

Each point covers 4 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 9.1 / 10
9.1aggregate

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 · 2026-09-06 10:37 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
10CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
5CII-Best-Practicesbadge detected: Passing
10Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
10Contributorsproject has 9 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 4 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
6Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 7
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Mavenorg.slf4j:slf4j-api2.0.19pom.xml
Mavencom.fasterxml.jackson:jackson-bom2.22.2pom.xml
Mavenio.cucumber:cucumber-bom7.34.7pom.xml
Mavenorg.junit:junit-bom6.1.3pom.xml
Mavenorg.revapi:revapi-java0.28.4pom.xml
Mavencom.github.spotbugs:spotbugs4.10.4pom.xml
Mavencom.puppycrawl.tools:checkstyle12.3.1pom.xml
All dependencies 51

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 7 direct and 44 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Mavencom.fasterxml.jackson:jackson-bom2.22.2direct
Mavencom.github.spotbugs:spotbugs4.10.4direct
Mavencom.puppycrawl.tools:checkstyle12.3.1direct
Mavenio.cucumber:cucumber-bom7.34.7direct
Mavenorg.junit:junit-bom6.1.3direct
Mavenorg.revapi:revapi-java0.28.4direct
Mavenorg.slf4j:slf4j-api2.0.19direct
Mavencom.diffplug.spotless:spotless-maven-plugin3.10.2indirect
Mavencom.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-annotationsindirect
Mavencom.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-coreindirect
Mavencom.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-databindindirect
Mavencom.github.spotbugs:spotbugs-maven-plugin4.10.4.1indirect
Mavencom.google.guava:guava33.7.1-jreindirect
Mavencom.h3xstream.findsecbugs:findsecbugs-plugin1.14.0indirect
Mavencom.tngtech.archunit:archunit-junit51.5.0indirect
Mavencom.vmlens:api1.2.28indirect
Mavencom.vmlens:vmlens-maven-plugin1.2.28indirect
Mavendev.cel:cel0.11.1indirect
Mavenio.cucumber:cucumber-javaindirect
Mavenio.cucumber:cucumber-junit-platform-engineindirect
Mavenio.cucumber:cucumber-picocontainerindirect
Mavennet.bytebuddy:byte-buddy1.18.13-jdk5indirect
Mavennet.bytebuddy:byte-buddy-agent1.18.13-jdk5indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-checkstyle-plugin3.6.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-compiler-plugin3.16.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-failsafe-plugin3.6.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-gpg-plugin3.2.8indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-jar-plugin3.5.1indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-javadoc-plugin3.12.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-resources-plugin3.5.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-source-plugin3.4.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-surefire-plugin3.6.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-toolchains-plugin3.3.0indirect
Mavenorg.assertj:assertj-core3.27.7indirect
Mavenorg.awaitility:awaitility4.3.0indirect
Mavenorg.codehaus.mojo:exec-maven-plugin3.6.3indirect
Mavenorg.codehaus.mojo:flatten-maven-plugin1.8.0indirect
Mavenorg.cyclonedx:cyclonedx-maven-plugin2.9.3indirect
Mavenorg.jacoco:jacoco-maven-plugin0.8.14indirect
Mavenorg.junit.jupiter:junit-jupiterindirect
Mavenorg.junit.jupiter:junit-jupiter-apiindirect
Mavenorg.junit.jupiter:junit-jupiter-engineindirect
Mavenorg.junit.jupiter:junit-jupiter-paramsindirect
Mavenorg.junit.platform:junit-platform-suiteindirect
Mavenorg.mockito:mockito-core5.23.0indirect
Mavenorg.openjdk.jmh:jmh-core1.37indirect
Mavenorg.projectlombok:lombok1.18.48indirect
Mavenorg.revapi:revapi-maven-plugin0.15.1indirect
Mavenorg.simplify4u:slf4j2-mock2.4.0indirect
Mavenorg.sonatype.central:central-publishing-maven-plugin0.10.0indirect
Mavenpw.krejci:jmh-maven-plugin0.2.2indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing maven:dev.openfeature:sdk@1.22.1 pulls in 1 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 statisticsMaven.