Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-27 21:09 UTC

open-feature / python-sdk

Python SDK for OpenFeature

PythonApache-2.0★ 109 stars⑂ 43 forkssince May 2022View on GitHub ↗

open-feature/python-sdk holds a health index of 95 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Security (94/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (62/100). It was last updated 44 days ago. 3 contributors account for most of its recent work.

95
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.

95
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 82 is calibrated to 95 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

OpenFeatureOrganization · verified domain
1,522 followers59 public repossince Feb 2022

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIopenfeature-sdk0.10.02,329,2642987 days agofeatureflagsopenfeaturetoggles

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

72Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recencylast push 44 days ago
14.5/36Commit cadence21/52 weeks with commits
16.2/18Commit volume62 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained7 commit(s) and 5 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year62
human_commit_share0.44
days_since_last_push44
active_weeks_last_year21
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases31 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 87 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~61.5 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count31
latest_release_tagv0.10.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release87
mean_days_between_releases61.5
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?

77Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
33/60Stars109 stars
13.5/25Forks43 forks
3.3/15Watchers5 watchers
Inputs used
forks43
stars109
watchers5
growth_stateorganic
growth_factor_pct100

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_badges5
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicescodecov.io, github.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads2,329,264 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesopenfeature-sdk
dependents
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads
monthly_downloads2,329,264
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?

89Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
36/54Bus factor3 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
17.3/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 23% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth29 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 16 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor3
contributors_sampled29
top_contributor_share0.232
How it's scored
36.2/42Issue resolution86% of issues closed
26.7/30PR acceptance475/533 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_prs475
open_issues11
closed_issues68
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.861
closed_unmerged_prs58
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 reach1,522 followers of open-feature
22/25Track record59 public repos, account ~4 yr old
Inputs used
followers1,522
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginopen-feature
public_repos59
account_age_days1,658

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 87 days ago
20/20Version history29 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesopenfeature-sdk
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish87

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

82Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configpyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.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_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://openfeature.dev
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics3 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicspython, openfeature, sdk
has_wikino
homepagehttps://openfeature.dev
docs_sitehttps://openfeature.dev
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

94Exceptional · 16% of overall

Security posture

92Excellent
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
0.5/2.5CII-Best-Practicesbadge detected: InProgress
7.5/7.5Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 16 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
7.5/7.5Maintained7 commit(s) and 5 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
5/5Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
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_aggregate9.2
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
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages23
unassessed_packages2
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 23 resolved dependencies against OSV. 2 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list. This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so the repository dependency graph was assessed instead. That graph mixes development and test pins with shipped dependencies, so only the declared runtime dependencies are scored; transitive findings are reported as context and excluded from the score. 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.

62Moderate · 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 history44 of 44 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
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format configpyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
11/11Static type checkingopenfeature/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance56 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsopenfeature/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.56
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable codePython with type-check config (openfeature/py.typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/65 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes34,729
source_files_sampled65
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

109GitHub stars
29contributors
62commits, last 12 months
44days since last push
31releases
3bus factor
11open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Star history carried forward from 2026-07-03: GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository admins, so it can no longer be collected. The repository has 109 stars today.

More detail

Star and fork history 106 ★ / 43 ⇿
106Stars
43Forks
31Releases

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.

Only the most recent history is shown — this repository exceeds the collection window, so the earliest history is not captured.

Star history is shown as collected on 2026-07-03. GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository administrators in July 2026, so this series can no longer be extended; the current star total above remains live.

02040608010012010643102022-052024-062026-07
Major 0Minor 10Patch 21

Each point covers 4 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 9.2 / 10
9.2aggregate

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 · 2026-08-27 21:09 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
2CII-Best-Practicesbadge detected: InProgress
10Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
10Contributorsproject has 16 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained7 commit(s) and 5 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
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
All dependencies 25

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 25 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIbackports-asyncio-runner1.2.0indirect
PyPIbehave1.3.3indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcoverageindirect
PyPIcoverage7.13.5indirect
PyPIcucumber-expressions19.0.0indirect
PyPIcucumber-tag-expressions9.1.0indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.3.1indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIopenfeature-sdk0.9.0indirect
PyPIpackaging26.0indirect
PyPIparse1.21.1indirect
PyPIparse-type0.6.6indirect
PyPIpastel0.2.1indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpoethepoet0.44.0indirect
PyPIprek0.4.3indirect
PyPIpygments2.20.0indirect
PyPIpytest9.0.3indirect
PyPIpytest-asyncio1.3.0indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPItomli2.4.1indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.15.0indirect
PyPIuv-buildindirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 23 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 2 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

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 statisticsPyPI.