Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-02 09:00 UTC

ouster-lidar / ouster-sdk

Cross-platform C++ and Python SDK for Ouster LiDAR sensors. Includes tools for visualization, data recording/replay, and sensor configuration

C++ · PythonBSD-3-Clause★ 528 stars⑂ 461 forkssince May 2018View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

ouster-lidar/ouster-sdk holds a health index of 83 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (81/100) and lowest on Security (56/100). It was last updated 31 days ago. 4 contributors account for most of its recent work.

83
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.

83
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 70 is calibrated to 83 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Ouster IncOrganization
118 followers10 public repossince Jan 2018

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPIouster_sdk1.0.173,0152949 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

60Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recency — last push 31 days ago
7.6/36Commit cadence — 11/52 weeks with commits
10.8/18Commit volume — 15 commits in the last year
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 2 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
commits_last_year15
human_commit_share0.99
days_since_last_push31
active_weeks_last_year11
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 22 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 49 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~85.7 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count22
latest_release_tagv1.0.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release49
mean_days_between_releases85.7
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?

70Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
44.2/60Stars — 528 stars
22.2/25Forks — 461 forks
8.9/15Watchers — 41 watchers
Inputs used
forks461
stars528
watchers41
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (BSD-3-Clause)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
64.8/80Monthly downloads — 73,015 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesouster_sdk
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads73,015
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?

78Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
43.2/54Bus factor — 4 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
18.4/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 18% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 34 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor4
contributors_sampled34
top_contributor_share0.181
How it's scored
37.3/42Issue resolution — 89% of issues closed
15.7/30PR acceptance — 88/168 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 0/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
15/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
Inputs used
merged_prs88
open_issues56
closed_issues442
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio0.888
closed_unmerged_prs80
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
14.9/25Owner reach — 118 followers of ouster-lidar
19.6/25Track record — 10 public repos, account ~8 yr old
Inputs used
followers118
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginouster-lidar
public_repos10
account_age_days3,192

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 49 days ago
20/20Version history — 29 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesouster_sdk
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish49

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

81Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .flake8
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
4/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 8 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://ouster.com
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 4 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicslidar, ouster, pointcloud, sdk
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://ouster.com
docs_sitehttps://ouster.com
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
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
0.5/2.5CI-Tests — 8 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7.5/7.5Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
2.2/7.5Maintained — 2 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 3
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 18 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate5.3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
13.4/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 2 affected: click 8.1.7 (high 7.2), flask 3.0.0 (moderate 4.3)
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
31.1/40No advisories left outstanding — 2 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 224 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories3
affected_packages2
assessed_packages34
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityhigh 1, moderate 1
direct_affected_packages2
Matched the pypi:ouster_sdk@1.0.1 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 34 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.

71Good · 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://ouster.com/llms.txt)
39.3/40Legible commit history — 73 of 99 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://ouster.com/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.737
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .flake8
11/11Static type checking — python/mypy.ini, python/src/ouster/cli/py.typed, python/src/ouster/sdk/algorithm/py.typed, python/src/ouster/sdk/bag/py.typed, python/src/ouster/sdk/core/py.typed, python/src/ouster/sdk/mapping/py.typed, python/src/ouster/sdk/osf/py.typed, python/src/ouster/sdk/pcap/py.typed, python/src/ouster/sdk/py.typed, python/src/ouster/sdk/sensor/py.typed, python/src/ouster/sdk/util/py.typed, python/src/ouster/sdk/viz/py.typed, tests/hil/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 1 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configspython/mypy.ini, python/src/ouster/cli/py.typed, python/src/ouster/sdk/algorithm/py.typed, python/src/ouster/sdk/bag/py.typed, python/src/ouster/sdk/core/py.typed, python/src/ouster/sdk/mapping/py.typed, python/src/ouster/sdk/osf/py.typed, python/src/ouster/sdk/pcap/py.typed, python/src/ouster/sdk/py.typed, python/src/ouster/sdk/sensor/py.typed, python/src/ouster/sdk/util/py.typed, python/src/ouster/sdk/viz/py.typed, tests/hil/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.01
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — C++ (statically typed)
53.5/55Manageable file sizes — 28/1,045 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageC++
largest_source_bytes968,351
source_files_sampled1,045
oversized_source_files28
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
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
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

528GitHub stars
34contributors
15commits, last 12 months
31days since last push
22releases
4bus factor
56open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 461 ⇿
0Stars
461Forks
22Releases

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.

012525037536252018-062022-072026-09
Major 1Minor 2Patch 3

Each point covers 8 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.3 / 10
5.3aggregate

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 · 2026-10-02 08:59 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
2CI-Tests8 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
10Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
10Contributorsproject has 4 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
3Maintained2 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 3
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities18 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 46

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 46 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIbreathe4.33.1indirect
PyPIclick—indirect
PyPIdocutils—indirect
PyPIflake8—indirect
PyPIflake8-formatter-junit-xml—indirect
PyPIflask3.0indirect
PyPIflufl-lock—indirect
PyPIgitpython—indirect
PyPIiniconfig—indirect
PyPIjinja2—indirect
PyPIlaspy—indirect
PyPIlibclang—indirect
PyPImatplotlib—indirect
PyPImore-itertools—indirect
PyPImypy—indirect
PyPInanobind2.9.2indirect
PyPInumpy—indirect
PyPIopencv-python—indirect
PyPIpackaging—indirect
PyPIpillow—indirect
PyPIprettytable—indirect
PyPIpsutil—indirect
PyPIpydemumble—indirect
PyPIpylsp-mypy—indirect
PyPIpyqt5—indirect
PyPIpytest—indirect
PyPIpytest-asyncio—indirect
PyPIpytest-xdist—indirect
PyPIpython-lsp-server—indirect
PyPIrequests—indirect
PyPIrosbags0.9.23indirect
PyPIsetuptools69.2.0indirect
PyPIsphinx—indirect
PyPIsphinx-autodoc-typehints1.17.0indirect
PyPIsphinx-copybutton0.5.0indirect
PyPIsphinx-rtd-size—indirect
PyPIsphinx-rtd-theme1.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinx-tabs3.3.1indirect
PyPIthreadpoolctl—indirect
PyPItqdm—indirect
PyPItree-sitter—indirect
PyPItree-sitter-cpp—indirect
PyPIwheel—indirect
PyPIwheel0.45.1indirect
PyPIyapf—indirect
PyPIzeroconf—indirect
Dependency advisories 2

Installing pypi:ouster_sdk@1.0.1 pulls in 34 packages, direct and transitive: 2 carry known advisories, of which 2 are direct dependencies.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
click8.1.7directhigh18.3.3
flask3.0.0directmoderate23.1.3

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.