Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-13 21:07 UTC

osrg / gobgp

BGP implemented in the Go Programming Language

Go · PythonApache-2.0★ 4,116 stars⑂ 834 forkssince Sep 2014View on GitHub ↗

KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

osrg/gobgp holds a health index of 92 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (94/100) and lowest on Sustainability & Governance (62/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts 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 78 is calibrated to 92 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

osrgOrganization

75 followers46 public repossince Nov 2011

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

Package ecosystems

Registry	Package	Version	Downloads / mo	Versions	Last publish
Go	github.com/osrg/gobgp/v4	v4.10.0	-	11	9 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

94Exceptional · 21% of overall

Development activity

97Exceptional

How it's scored

36/36	Push recency — last push 0 days ago
33.2/36	Commit cadence — 48/52 weeks with commits
18/18	Commit volume — 553 commits in the last year
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 10 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

commits_last_year	553
human_commit_share	1
days_since_last_push	0
active_weeks_last_year	48

Release discipline

90Excellent

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 99 releases published
36/36	Release recency — latest release 9 days ago
27/27	Release cadence — a release every ~34.1 days
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.

Inputs used

releases_count	99
latest_release_tag	v4.10.0
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	9
mean_days_between_releases	34.1

Community & Adoption

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

86Excellent · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

94Exceptional

How it's scored

58.6/60	Stars — 4,116 stars
24.3/25	Forks — 834 forks
11.3/15	Watchers — 107 watchers

Inputs used

forks	834
stars	4,116
watchers	107
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

77Good

How it's scored

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

Inputs used

has_readme	yes
has_license	yes
readme_badges	5
has_contributing	yes
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	no
readme_badge_services	github.com, goreportcard.com, pkg.go.dev, shields.io
has_pull_request_template	yes

Sustainability & Governance

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

62Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

43Weak

How it's scored

9/54	Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
10.6/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 53% of commits
13.5/13.5	Contributor breadth — 99 contributors
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 29 contributing companies or organizations

Inputs used

bus_factor	1
contributors_sampled	99
top_contributor_share	0.529

Issue & PR responsiveness

48Weak

How it's scored

32/42	Issue resolution — 76% of issues closed
16.3/30	PR acceptance — 1,557/2,873 decided PRs merged
0/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — 0/8 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
0/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

merged_prs	1,557
open_issues	199
closed_issues	632
prs_merged_7d	10
prs_decided_7d	33
prs_merged_30d	28
prs_decided_30d	60
issue_closed_ratio	0.761
closed_unmerged_prs	1,316
first_time_authors_30d	4
first_time_prs_merged_30d	0
first_time_prs_decided_30d	8

Ownership & stewardship

68Good

How it's scored

30/30	Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20	Verified domain
13.5/25	Owner reach — 75 followers of osrg
24.2/25	Track record — 46 public repos, account ~14 yr old

Inputs used

followers	75
owner_type	Organization
is_verified	no
owner_login	osrg
public_repos	46
account_age_days	5,453

Package maintenance

100Exceptional

How it's scored

25/25	Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on go
35/35	Publish recency — latest publish 9 days ago
20/20	Version history — 11 published versions
20/20	Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked

Inputs used

packages	github.com/osrg/gobgp/v4
ecosystems	go
any_deprecated	no
min_days_since_publish	9

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

82Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

84Excellent

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
16/16	Linter config — .golangci.yml, .pylintrc
0/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4	.editorconfig
20/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 7 out of 7 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

80Excellent

How it's scored

30/30	README
25/25	Documentation directory
15/15	Documentation / homepage site — https://osrg.github.io/gobgp/
10/10	Repository description
0/10	Topics
0/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	—
has_wiki	no
homepage	https://osrg.github.io/gobgp/
docs_site	https://osrg.github.io/gobgp/
has_readme	yes
has_docs_dir	yes
has_description	yes

Security

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

69Good · 16% of overall

Security posture

61Moderate

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 — 7 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0.5/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — badge detected: InProgress
0/7.5	Code-Review — Found 0/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5	Contributors — project has 29 contributing companies or organizations
10/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5	Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
5/5	Fuzzing — project is fuzzed
2.5/2.5	License — license file detected
7.5/7.5	Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 10 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
3.8/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 5 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	17
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	1
scorecard_aggregate	6.1

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	5
affected_packages	1
assessed_packages	54
unassessed_packages	8
affected_by_severity	unknown 1
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 54 resolved dependencies against OSV. 8 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.

66Good · 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 — 98 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	no
llms_txt_url	—
legible_history_share	0.98
agent_instruction_files	—
agent_instruction_max_bytes	—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

82Excellent

How it's scored

18/18	One-command bootstrap — tools/grpc/cpp/Makefile
22/22	Automated tests
11/11	Lint / format config — .golangci.yml, .pylintrc
11/11	Static type checking — Go (statically typed)
10/10	Reproducible environment — lockfile
10/10	Demonstrated agent practice — 5 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8	Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
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	go.sum
has_dockerfile	no
typed_language	yes
bootstrap_files	tools/grpc/cpp/Makefile
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	yes
typecheck_configs	—
agent_commit_share	0.05
toolchain_manifests	go.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share	0

Code legibility for models

94Exceptional

How it's scored

45/45	Type-checkable code — Go (statically typed)
49.5/55	Manageable file sizes — 23/228 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	Go
largest_source_bytes	498,826
source_files_sampled	228
oversized_source_files	23

Machine-readable interfaces

50Moderate

How it's scored

40/40	API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — proto/api/attribute.proto, proto/api/capability.proto, proto/api/common.proto, proto/api/extcom.proto, proto/api/gobgp.proto, proto/api/nlri.proto
0/20	MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
0/40	Runnable examples

Inputs used

example_dirs	—
has_mcp_signal	no
api_schema_files	proto/api/attribute.proto, proto/api/capability.proto, proto/api/common.proto, proto/api/extcom.proto, proto/api/gobgp.proto, proto/api/nlri.proto
interfaces_expected_of	—

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

4,116GitHub stars

99contributors

553commits, last 12 months

0days since last push

99releases

1bus factor

199open issues

Gopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
First-time contributor figures cover 12 of 14 authors (cap 12)

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 834 ⇿

0Stars

834Forks

98Releases

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 3Minor 79Patch 0

Each point covers 11 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.1 / 10

6.1aggregate

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 · 2026-10-13 21:07 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	7 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
2	CII-Best-Practices	badge detected: InProgress
0	Code-Review	Found 0/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10	Contributors	project has 29 contributing companies or organizations
10	Dangerous-Workflow	no dangerous workflow patterns detected
10	Dependency-Update-Tool	update tool detected
10	Fuzzing	project is fuzzed
10	License	license file detected
10	Maintained	30 commit(s) and 10 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
5	Vulnerabilities	5 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 29

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
Go	github.com/BurntSushi/toml	`v1.5.0`	go.mod
Go	github.com/coreos/go-systemd/v22	`v22.5.0`	go.mod
Go	github.com/dgryski/go-farm	`v0.0.0-20240924180020-3414d57e47da`	go.mod
Go	github.com/eapache/channels	`v1.1.0`	go.mod
Go	github.com/fsnotify/fsnotify	`v1.9.0`	go.mod
Go	github.com/gaissmai/bart	`v0.26.1`	go.mod
Go	github.com/getsentry/sentry-go	`v0.34.1`	go.mod
Go	github.com/go-test/deep	`v1.1.1`	go.mod
Go	github.com/go-viper/mapstructure/v2	`v2.4.0`	go.mod
Go	github.com/google/go-cmp	`v0.7.0`	go.mod
Go	github.com/google/uuid	`v1.6.0`	go.mod
Go	github.com/grpc-ecosystem/go-grpc-prometheus	`v1.2.0`	go.mod
Go	github.com/jessevdk/go-flags	`v1.6.1`	go.mod
Go	github.com/k-sone/critbitgo	`v1.4.0`	go.mod
Go	github.com/kr/pretty	`v0.3.1`	go.mod
Go	github.com/orcaman/concurrent-map/v2	`v2.0.1`	go.mod
Go	github.com/prometheus/client_golang	`v1.16.0`	go.mod
Go	github.com/prometheus/client_model	`v0.3.0`	go.mod
Go	github.com/segmentio/fasthash	`v1.0.3`	go.mod
Go	github.com/spf13/cobra	`v1.9.1`	go.mod
Go	github.com/spf13/viper	`v1.20.1`	go.mod
Go	github.com/stretchr/testify	`v1.10.0`	go.mod
Go	github.com/vishvananda/netlink	`v1.3.1`	go.mod
Go	go.uber.org/goleak	`v1.3.0`	go.mod
Go	golang.org/x/sys	`v0.47.0`	go.mod
Go	golang.org/x/text	`v0.41.0`	go.mod
Go	golang.org/x/time	`v0.12.0`	go.mod
Go	google.golang.org/grpc	`v1.83.2`	go.mod
Go	google.golang.org/protobuf	`v1.36.11`	go.mod

All dependencies 62

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 29 direct and 33 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
Go	github.com/burntsushi/toml	`v1.5.0`	direct
Go	github.com/coreos/go-systemd/v22	`v22.5.0`	direct
Go	github.com/dgryski/go-farm	`v0.0.0-20240924180020-3414d57e47da`	direct
Go	github.com/eapache/channels	`v1.1.0`	direct
Go	github.com/fsnotify/fsnotify	`v1.9.0`	direct
Go	github.com/gaissmai/bart	`v0.26.1`	direct
Go	github.com/getsentry/sentry-go	`v0.34.1`	direct
Go	github.com/go-test/deep	`v1.1.1`	direct
Go	github.com/go-viper/mapstructure/v2	`v2.4.0`	direct
Go	github.com/google/go-cmp	`v0.7.0`	direct
Go	github.com/google/uuid	`v1.6.0`	direct
Go	github.com/grpc-ecosystem/go-grpc-prometheus	`v1.2.0`	direct
Go	github.com/jessevdk/go-flags	`v1.6.1`	direct
Go	github.com/k-sone/critbitgo	`v1.4.0`	direct
Go	github.com/kr/pretty	`v0.3.1`	direct
Go	github.com/orcaman/concurrent-map/v2	`v2.0.1`	direct
Go	github.com/prometheus/client_golang	`v1.16.0`	direct
Go	github.com/prometheus/client_model	`v0.3.0`	direct
Go	github.com/segmentio/fasthash	`v1.0.3`	direct
Go	github.com/spf13/cobra	`v1.9.1`	direct
Go	github.com/spf13/viper	`v1.20.1`	direct
Go	github.com/stretchr/testify	`v1.10.0`	direct
Go	github.com/vishvananda/netlink	`v1.3.1`	direct
Go	go.uber.org/goleak	`v1.3.0`	direct
Go	golang.org/x/sys	`v0.47.0`	direct
Go	golang.org/x/text	`v0.41.0`	direct
Go	golang.org/x/time	`v0.12.0`	direct
Go	google.golang.org/grpc	`v1.83.2`	direct
Go	google.golang.org/protobuf	`v1.36.11`	direct
Go	github.com/beorn7/perks	`v1.0.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/cespare/xxhash/v2	`v2.3.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/davecgh/go-spew	`v1.1.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/eapache/queue	`v1.1.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/golang/protobuf	`v1.5.4`	indirect
Go	github.com/inconshreveable/mousetrap	`v1.1.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/kr/text	`v0.2.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/matttproud/golang_protobuf_extensions	`v1.0.4`	indirect
Go	github.com/pelletier/go-toml/v2	`v2.2.3`	indirect
Go	github.com/pmezard/go-difflib	`v1.0.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/prometheus/common	`v0.42.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/prometheus/procfs	`v0.10.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/rogpeppe/go-internal	`v1.9.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/sagikazarmark/locafero	`v0.7.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/sourcegraph/conc	`v0.3.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/spf13/afero	`v1.12.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/spf13/cast	`v1.7.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/spf13/pflag	`v1.0.6`	indirect
Go	github.com/subosito/gotenv	`v1.6.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/vishvananda/netns	`v0.0.5`	indirect
Go	go.uber.org/atomic	`v1.9.0`	indirect
Go	go.uber.org/multierr	`v1.9.0`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/net	`v0.58.0`	indirect
Go	google.golang.org/genproto/googleapis/rpc	`v0.0.0-20260526163538-3dc84a4a5aaa`	indirect
Go	gopkg.in/yaml.v3	`v3.0.1`	indirect
PyPI	docker-py	`—`	indirect
PyPI	fabric	`—`	indirect
PyPI	netaddr	`—`	indirect
PyPI	nose	`—`	indirect
PyPI	nsenter	`—`	indirect
PyPI	pyyaml	`—`	indirect
PyPI	ryu	`—`	indirect
PyPI	toml	`—`	indirect

Dependency advisories 1

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 54 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 1 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 8 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

Package	Version	Relation	Severity	Advisories	Fixed in
golang.org/x/net	`v0.58.0`	indirect	unknown	5	`1.27.2`

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 — Go.

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Key facts

Data collection warnings

More detail

Feedback

Related records