Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-19 20:40 UTC

open-feature / spec

OpenFeature specification

Python · GherkinApache-2.0★ 1,258 stars⑂ 58 forkssince Feb 2022View on GitHub ↗

#specification #feature-flags #openfeature

open-feature/spec holds a health index of 91 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (81/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (58/100). It was last updated today. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

overall / 100

Excellent

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.

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)

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 77 is calibrated to 91 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

OpenFeatureOrganization · verified domain

1,537 followers60 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?

78Good · 21% of overall

Development activity

80Excellent

How it's scored

36/36	Push recency — last push 0 days ago
18/36	Commit cadence — 26/52 weeks with commits
15.8/18	Commit volume — 57 commits in the last year
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 26 commit(s) and 7 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

commits_last_year	57
human_commit_share	0.53
days_since_last_push	0
active_weeks_last_year	26

Release discipline

76Good

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 12 releases published
36/36	Release recency — latest release 52 days ago
12.6/27	Release cadence — a release every ~160.9 days
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.

Inputs used

releases_count	12
latest_release_tag	v0.9.0
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	52
mean_days_between_releases	160.9

Community & Adoption

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

81Excellent · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

72Good

How it's scored

50.3/60	Stars — 1,258 stars
14.6/25	Forks — 58 forks
7.4/15	Watchers — 22 watchers

Inputs used

forks	58
stars	1,258
watchers	22
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

92Excellent

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
22.5/22.5	License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18	CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5	Code of conduct
0/7.2	Issue template
6.3/6.3	PR template

Inputs used

has_readme	yes
has_license	yes
readme_badges	4
has_contributing	yes
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	yes
readme_badge_services	bestpractices.coreinfrastructure.org, shields.io
has_pull_request_template	yes

Sustainability & Governance

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

80Excellent · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

62Moderate

How it's scored

25.2/54	Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
13.5/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 40% of commits
13.5/13.5	Contributor breadth — 36 contributors
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 24 contributing companies or organizations

Inputs used

bus_factor	2
contributors_sampled	36
top_contributor_share	0.399

Issue & PR responsiveness

86Excellent

How it's scored

32/42	Issue resolution — 76% of issues closed
27.3/30	PR acceptance — 253/278 decided PRs merged
13/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — 1/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
13.5/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 10/11 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9

Inputs used

merged_prs	253
open_issues	31
closed_issues	99
prs_merged_7d	1
prs_decided_7d	1
prs_merged_30d	2
prs_decided_30d	2
issue_closed_ratio	0.762
closed_unmerged_prs	25
first_time_authors_30d	1
first_time_prs_merged_30d	1
first_time_prs_decided_30d	1

Ownership & stewardship

95Exceptional

How it's scored

30/30	Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20	Verified domain
22.9/25	Owner reach — 1,537 followers of open-feature
22.2/25	Track record — 60 public repos, account ~4 yr old

Inputs used

followers	1,537
owner_type	Organization
is_verified	yes
owner_login	open-feature
public_repos	60
account_age_days	1,681

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

76Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

84Excellent

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 4 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
16/16	Linter config — tools/repo_parser/pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
0/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4	.editorconfig
20/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

has_ci	yes
has_tests	yes
has_editorconfig	no
has_linter_config	yes
has_precommit_config	no

Documentation

65Good

How it's scored

30/30	README
0/25	Documentation directory
15/15	Documentation / homepage site — https://openfeature.dev
10/10	Repository description
10/10	Topics — 3 topics
0/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	specification, feature-flags, openfeature
has_wiki	no
homepage	https://openfeature.dev
docs_site	https://openfeature.dev
has_readme	yes
has_docs_dir	no
has_description	yes

Security

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

72Good · 16% of overall

Security posture

65Good

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5	Branch-Protection — no data
2.5/2.5	CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
1.2/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — badge detected: Passing
6.8/7.5	Code-Review — Found 10/11 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
2.5/2.5	Contributors — project has 24 contributing companies or organizations
10/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5	Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5	Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5	License — license file detected
7.5/7.5	Maintained — 26 commit(s) and 7 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5	Packaging — packaging workflow detected
0/5	Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5	SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
5/5	Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5	Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5	Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
5.2/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 3 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	17
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	1
scorecard_aggregate	6.5

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional

How it's scored

35/35	Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25	Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40	No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date

Inputs used

source	osv
advisories	4
affected_packages	3
assessed_packages	193
unassessed_packages	4
affected_by_severity	high 3
direct_affected_packages	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 193 resolved dependencies against OSV. 4 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.

58Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

40Weak

How it's scored

0/45	Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40	Legible commit history — 53 of 53 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	no
llms_txt_url	—
legible_history_share	1
agent_instruction_files	—
agent_instruction_max_bytes	—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

73Good

How it's scored

18/18	One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22	Automated tests
11/11	Lint / format config — tools/repo_parser/pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
0/11	Static type checking
10/10	Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
4/10	Demonstrated agent practice — 2 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8	Automated maintenance — 47 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

has_nix	no
has_tests	yes
lockfiles	package-lock.json
has_dockerfile	yes
typed_language	no
bootstrap_files	Makefile
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	yes
typecheck_configs	—
agent_commit_share	0.02
toolchain_manifests	—
dependency_bot_commit_share	0.47

Code legibility for models

55Moderate

How it's scored

0/45	Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
55/55	Manageable file sizes — 0/5 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	Python
largest_source_bytes	25,759
source_files_sampled	5
oversized_source_files	0

Key facts

1,258GitHub stars

36contributors

57commits, last 12 months

0days since last push

12releases

2bus factor

31open issues

npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 58 ⇿

0Stars

58Forks

12Releases

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.

Major 0Minor 9Patch 3

Each point covers 5 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.5 / 10

6.5aggregate

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 · 2026-09-19 20:39 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
n/a	Branch-Protection	internal 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
10	CI-Tests	30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
5	CII-Best-Practices	badge detected: Passing
9	Code-Review	Found 10/11 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
10	Contributors	project has 24 contributing companies or organizations
10	Dangerous-Workflow	no dangerous workflow patterns detected
10	Dependency-Update-Tool	update tool detected
0	Fuzzing	project is not fuzzed
10	License	license file detected
10	Maintained	26 commit(s) and 7 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10	Packaging	packaging workflow detected
0	Pinned-Dependencies	dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0	SAST	SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10	Security-Policy	security policy file detected
0	Signed-Releases	Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0	Token-Permissions	detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7	Vulnerabilities	3 existing vulnerabilities detected

All dependencies 197

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 197 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
npm	@oozcitak/dom	`2.0.2`	indirect
npm	@oozcitak/infra	`2.0.2`	indirect
npm	@oozcitak/url	`3.0.0`	indirect
npm	@oozcitak/util	`10.0.0`	indirect
npm	@types/debug	`4.1.13`	indirect
npm	@types/katex	`0.16.8`	indirect
npm	@types/ms	`2.1.0`	indirect
npm	@types/unist	`2.0.11`	indirect
npm	agent-base	`9.0.0`	indirect
npm	ansi-red	`0.1.1`	indirect
npm	ansi-regex	`6.2.2`	indirect
npm	ansi-wrap	`0.1.0`	indirect
npm	argparse	`1.0.10`	indirect
npm	argparse	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	ast-types	`0.13.4`	indirect
npm	async	`3.2.6`	indirect
npm	autolinker	`0.28.1`	indirect
npm	balanced-match	`4.0.4`	indirect
npm	basic-ftp	`5.3.1`	indirect
npm	boolbase	`1.0.0`	indirect
npm	brace-expansion	`5.0.9`	indirect
npm	buffer-from	`1.1.2`	indirect
npm	chalk	`6.0.0`	indirect
npm	character-entities	`2.0.2`	indirect
npm	character-entities-legacy	`3.0.0`	indirect
npm	character-reference-invalid	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	cheerio	`1.0.0-rc.11`	indirect
npm	cheerio-select	`2.1.0`	indirect
npm	coffee-script	`1.12.7`	indirect
npm	commander	`15.0.0`	indirect
npm	commander	`8.3.0`	indirect
npm	concat-stream	`1.6.2`	indirect
npm	concat-with-sourcemaps	`1.1.0`	indirect
npm	core-util-is	`1.0.3`	indirect
npm	css-select	`5.1.0`	indirect
npm	css-what	`6.1.0`	indirect
npm	data-uri-to-buffer	`8.0.0`	indirect
npm	debug	`4.3.4`	indirect
npm	decode-named-character-reference	`1.3.0`	indirect
npm	deep-extend	`0.6.0`	indirect
npm	degenerator	`7.0.1`	indirect
npm	dequal	`2.0.3`	indirect
npm	devlop	`1.1.0`	indirect
npm	diacritics-map	`0.1.0`	indirect
npm	dom-serializer	`2.0.0`	indirect
npm	domelementtype	`2.3.0`	indirect
npm	domhandler	`5.0.3`	indirect
npm	domutils	`3.0.1`	indirect
npm	entities	`4.5.0`	indirect
npm	escodegen	`2.1.0`	indirect
npm	esprima	`4.0.1`	indirect
npm	estraverse	`5.3.0`	indirect
npm	esutils	`2.0.3`	indirect
npm	expand-range	`1.8.2`	indirect
npm	extend-shallow	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	fdir	`6.5.0`	indirect
npm	fill-range	`2.2.4`	indirect
npm	for-in	`1.0.2`	indirect
npm	get-east-asian-width	`1.6.0`	indirect
npm	get-uri	`8.0.1`	indirect
npm	gray-matter	`2.1.1`	indirect
npm	gulp-header	`1.8.12`	indirect
npm	html-link-extractor	`1.0.5`	indirect
npm	htmlparser2	`8.0.1`	indirect
npm	http-proxy-agent	`9.1.0`	indirect
npm	https-proxy-agent	`9.1.0`	indirect
npm	iconv-lite	`0.6.3`	indirect
npm	ignore	`7.0.6`	indirect
npm	inherits	`2.0.4`	indirect
npm	ini	`7.0.0`	indirect
npm	ip-address	`10.4.0`	indirect
npm	is-absolute-url	`4.0.1`	indirect
npm	is-alphabetical	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	is-alphanumerical	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	is-buffer	`1.1.6`	indirect
npm	is-decimal	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	is-extendable	`0.1.1`	indirect
npm	is-extendable	`1.0.1`	indirect
npm	is-hexadecimal	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	is-number	`2.1.0`	indirect
npm	is-number	`4.0.0`	indirect
npm	is-plain-object	`2.0.4`	indirect
npm	is-relative-url	`4.1.0`	indirect
npm	isarray	`1.0.0`	indirect
npm	isobject	`2.1.0`	indirect
npm	isobject	`3.0.1`	indirect
npm	js-yaml	`3.15.1`	indirect
npm	js-yaml	`4.3.1`	indirect
npm	js-yaml	`5.2.3`	indirect
npm	jsonc-parser	`3.3.1`	indirect
npm	jsonpointer	`5.0.1`	indirect
npm	katex	`0.16.47`	indirect
npm	kind-of	`3.2.2`	indirect
npm	kind-of	`6.0.3`	indirect
npm	lazy-cache	`2.0.2`	indirect
npm	link-check	`5.6.0`	indirect
npm	linkify-it	`5.0.2`	indirect
npm	list-item	`1.1.1`	indirect
npm	lodash._reinterpolate	`3.0.0`	indirect
npm	lodash.template	`4.18.1`	indirect
npm	lodash.templatesettings	`4.2.0`	indirect
npm	lru-cache	`7.18.3`	indirect
npm	markdown-it	`14.3.0`	indirect
npm	markdown-link	`0.1.1`	indirect
npm	markdown-link-check	`3.15.0`	indirect
npm	markdown-link-extractor	`4.0.4`	indirect
npm	markdown-toc	`1.2.0`	indirect
npm	markdownlint	`0.41.1`	indirect
npm	markdownlint-cli	`0.49.1`	indirect
npm	marked	`18.0.9`	indirect
npm	math-random	`1.0.4`	indirect
npm	mdurl	`2.1.0`	indirect
npm	micromark	`4.0.2`	indirect
npm	micromark-core-commonmark	`2.0.3`	indirect
npm	micromark-extension-directive	`4.0.0`	indirect
npm	micromark-extension-gfm-autolink-literal	`2.1.0`	indirect
npm	micromark-extension-gfm-footnote	`2.1.0`	indirect
npm	micromark-extension-gfm-table	`2.1.1`	indirect
npm	micromark-extension-math	`3.1.0`	indirect
npm	micromark-factory-destination	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	micromark-factory-label	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	micromark-factory-space	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	micromark-factory-title	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	micromark-factory-whitespace	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	micromark-util-character	`2.1.1`	indirect
npm	micromark-util-chunked	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	micromark-util-classify-character	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	micromark-util-combine-extensions	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	micromark-util-decode-numeric-character-reference	`2.0.2`	indirect
npm	micromark-util-encode	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	micromark-util-html-tag-name	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	micromark-util-normalize-identifier	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	micromark-util-resolve-all	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	micromark-util-sanitize-uri	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	micromark-util-subtokenize	`2.1.0`	indirect
npm	micromark-util-symbol	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	micromark-util-types	`2.0.2`	indirect
npm	minimatch	`10.2.5`	indirect
npm	minimist	`1.2.8`	indirect
npm	mixin-deep	`1.3.2`	indirect
npm	ms	`2.1.2`	indirect
npm	ms	`2.1.3`	indirect
npm	needle	`3.5.0`	indirect
npm	netmask	`2.1.1`	indirect
npm	node-email-verifier	`4.0.0`	indirect
npm	nth-check	`2.1.1`	indirect
npm	object.pick	`1.3.0`	indirect
npm	pac-proxy-agent	`9.1.0`	indirect
npm	pac-resolver	`9.0.1`	indirect
npm	parse-entities	`4.0.2`	indirect
npm	parse5	`7.0.0`	indirect
npm	parse5-htmlparser2-tree-adapter	`7.0.0`	indirect
npm	picomatch	`4.0.4`	indirect
npm	prettier	`3.9.7`	indirect
npm	process-nextick-args	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	progress	`2.0.3`	indirect
npm	proxy-agent	`8.0.2`	indirect
npm	proxy-agent-negotiate	`1.1.0`	indirect
npm	proxy-from-env	`2.1.0`	indirect
npm	punycode.js	`2.3.1`	indirect
npm	quickjs-wasi	`2.2.0`	indirect
npm	randomatic	`3.1.1`	indirect
npm	readable-stream	`2.3.7`	indirect
npm	remarkable	`1.7.4`	indirect
npm	repeat-element	`1.1.4`	indirect
npm	repeat-string	`1.6.1`	indirect
npm	run-con	`1.3.3`	indirect
npm	safe-buffer	`5.1.2`	indirect
npm	safer-buffer	`2.1.2`	indirect
npm	sax	`1.6.1`	indirect
npm	set-getter	`0.1.1`	indirect
npm	smart-buffer	`4.2.0`	indirect
npm	smol-toml	`1.7.1`	indirect
npm	socks	`2.8.9`	indirect
npm	socks-proxy-agent	`10.1.0`	indirect
npm	source-map	`0.6.1`	indirect
npm	sprintf-js	`1.0.3`	indirect
npm	string-width	`8.2.1`	indirect
npm	string_decoder	`1.1.1`	indirect
npm	strip-ansi	`7.2.0`	indirect
npm	strip-color	`0.1.0`	indirect
npm	strip-json-comments	`3.1.1`	indirect
npm	through2	`2.0.5`	indirect
npm	tinyglobby	`0.2.17`	indirect
npm	to-object-path	`0.3.0`	indirect
npm	toml	`2.3.6`	indirect
npm	tslib	`2.4.0`	indirect
npm	typedarray	`0.0.6`	indirect
npm	uc.micro	`2.1.0`	indirect
npm	util-deprecate	`1.0.2`	indirect
npm	validator	`13.15.35`	indirect
npm	xmlbuilder2	`4.0.3`	indirect
npm	xtend	`4.0.2`	indirect
PyPI	mypy	`—`	indirect
PyPI	pytest	`—`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-cov	`—`	indirect
PyPI	ruff	`—`	indirect

Dependency advisories 3

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 193 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 3 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 4 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

Package	Version	Relation	Severity	Advisories	Fixed in
js-yaml	`3.15.1`	indirect	high	1	`4.3.2`
js-yaml	`4.3.1`	indirect	high	1	`4.3.2`
toml	`2.3.6`	indirect	high	2	`4.2.0`

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.

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 statistics.

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Metrics by category

Key facts

Data collection warnings

More detail

Feedback

Related records