Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-26 02:46 UTC

opengeos / leafmap

A Python package for interactive mapping and geospatial analysis with minimal coding in a Jupyter environment

PythonMIT★ 3,772 stars⑂ 472 forkssince Mar 2021View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

opengeos/leafmap holds a health index of 94 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (96/100) and lowest on Security (56/100). It was last updated 4 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

94
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.

94
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 80 is calibrated to 94 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

4,094 followers174 public repossince Apr 2023

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIleafmap0.63.133,27430855 days agoleafmap

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

93Exceptional · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 4 days ago
25.6/36Commit cadence — 37/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 148 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — no data
Inputs used
commits_last_year148
human_commit_share0.71
days_since_last_push4
active_weeks_last_year37

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 55 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~19.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv0.63.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release55
mean_days_between_releases19.3

Community & Adoption

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

84Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
58/60Stars — 3,772 stars
22.3/25Forks — 472 forks
9.8/15Watchers — 58 watchers
Inputs used
forks472
stars3,772
watchers58
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges8
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
60.3/80Monthly downloads — 33,274 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesleafmap
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads33,274
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?

71Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
1.3/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 94% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 44 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — no data
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled44
top_contributor_share0.942
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
28.9/30PR acceptance — 780/810 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — no data
Inputs used
merged_prs780
open_issues0
closed_issues319
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs30
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 backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
25/25Owner reach — 4,094 followers of opengeos
20/25Track record — 174 public repos, account ~3 yr old
Inputs used
followers4,094
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginopengeos
public_repos174
account_age_days1,270

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 55 days ago
20/20Version history — 308 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesleafmap
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish55

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

96Exceptional · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

100Exceptional
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 14 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.flake8])
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://leafmap.org
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 19 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsipyleaflet, folium, mapping, python, geopython, jupyter-notebook, jupyter, gis, dataviz, data-science, whiteboxtools, geospatial, geospatial-analysis, leafmap, streamlit, streamlit-webapp, plotly, geoparquet, solara
has_wikino
homepagehttps://leafmap.org
docs_sitehttps://leafmap.org
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

56Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
0/30Security policy (SECURITY.md)
25/25Dependabot config
0/25Dependency lockfiles
20/20CodeQL workflow
Inputs used
sourcefile_signals
lockfiles—
manifestspyproject.toml, requirements.txt, requirements_dev.txt, requirements_docs.txt
has_codeql_workflowyes
has_security_policyno
has_dependabot_configyes

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages110
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 pypi:leafmap@0.63.1 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 110 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.

65Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://docs.xarray.dev/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 57 of 71 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://docs.xarray.dev/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.803
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.flake8])
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 10 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 20 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.1
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.2
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
45.4/55Manageable file sizes — 7/40 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes700,210
source_files_sampled40
oversized_source_files7
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — examples, notebooks
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples, notebooks
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

3,772GitHub stars
44contributors
148commits, last 12 months
4days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
0open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • OpenSSF Scorecard timed out after 240s; skipping Scorecard checks

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 472 ⇿
0Stars
472Forks
100Releases

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.

0100200300400500466482021-032023-122026-09
Major 0Minor 22Patch 78

Each point covers 6 days.

All dependencies 81

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 81 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIanywidget—indirect
PyPIblack—indirect
PyPIbokeh—indirect
PyPIboto3—indirect
PyPIbqplot—indirect
PyPIbump2version—indirect
PyPIcogeo-mosaic—indirect
PyPIcoverage—indirect
PyPId2spy—indirect
PyPIduckdb—indirect
PyPIearthaccess—indirect
PyPIffmpeg-python—indirect
PyPIfiona—indirect
PyPIflake8—indirect
PyPIfolium—indirect
PyPIgdown—indirect
PyPIgeojson—indirect
PyPIgeopandas—indirect
PyPIgradio—indirect
PyPIgrip—indirect
PyPIh3—indirect
PyPIh5netcdf—indirect
PyPIh5py—indirect
PyPIipyevents—indirect
PyPIipyfilechooser—indirect
PyPIipykernel—indirect
PyPIipyleaflet—indirect
PyPIipyvue—indirect
PyPIipyvuetify—indirect
PyPIipywidgets—indirect
PyPIlaspy—indirect
PyPIlivereload—indirect
PyPIlocaltileserver—indirect
PyPIlonboard—indirect
PyPImapclassify—indirect
PyPImaplibre—indirect
PyPImatplotlib—indirect
PyPImkdocstrings—indirect
PyPImkdocstrings-python—indirect
PyPImss—indirect
PyPInbconvert—indirect
PyPInbformat—indirect
PyPInetcdf4—indirect
PyPInumpy—indirect
PyPIobstore—indirect
PyPIopera-utils—indirect
PyPIosmnx—indirect
PyPIoverturemaps—indirect
PyPIowslib—indirect
PyPIpalettable—indirect
PyPIpandas—indirect
PyPIpip—indirect
PyPIplotly—indirect
PyPIpmtiles—indirect
PyPIpre-commit—indirect
PyPIpsutil—indirect
PyPIpycrs—indirect
PyPIpydeck—indirect
PyPIpygments—indirect
PyPIpymdown-extensions—indirect
PyPIpyntcloud—indirect
PyPIpystac-client—indirect
PyPIpython-box—indirect
PyPIpyvista-xarray—indirect
PyPIpyyaml—indirect
PyPIrasterio—indirect
PyPIrasterstats—indirect
PyPIrio-cogeo—indirect
PyPIrioxarray—indirect
PyPIscooby—indirect
PyPIsetuptools—indirect
PyPIsetuptools-scm—indirect
PyPIsphinx—indirect
PyPItomli—indirect
PyPItox—indirect
PyPItwine—indirect
PyPIwatchdog—indirect
PyPIwheel—indirect
PyPIwhiteboxgui—indirect
PyPIxyzservices—indirect
PyPIzensical—indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:leafmap@0.63.1 pulls in 110 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 statistics — PyPI.