Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-15 18:33 UTC

paiml / ruchy

Ruchy, a systems-oriented scripting language that transpiles to Rust.

RustMIT★ 62 stars⑂ 4 forkssince Aug 2025View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryNetwork serviceCommand-line toolhow this is determined

paiml/ruchy holds a health index of 75 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (90/100) and lowest on Security (25/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

75
overall / 100
Good

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.

75
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 65 is calibrated to 75 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Pragmatic AI LabsOrganization
337 followers194 public repossince Nov 2016

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
crates.ioruchy4.2.15,7123869 days agocompilerscriptingrustlanguagetranspilercompilersdevelopment-toolsparser-implementations
crates.ioruchy-wasm4.2.176719 days agocompilerbrowserwasmwebassemblyruchycompilersweb-programming

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

86Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
18.7/36Commit cadence — 27/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 2,964 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year2,964
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year27
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~35 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagnightly
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases35

Community & Adoption

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

53Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
29/60Stars — 62 stars
4/25Forks — 4 forks
0/15Watchers — 2 watchers
Inputs used
forks4
stars62
watchers2
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges4
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
50.2/80Monthly downloads — 5,788 downloads/month across crates
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesruchy, ruchy-wasm
dependents—
ecosystemscrates
total_downloads135,871
monthly_downloads5,788
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?

60Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.1/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits
4.1/13.5Contributor breadth — 3 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled3
top_contributor_share0.996
How it's scored
30.9/42Issue resolution — 74% of issues closed
26.3/30PR acceptance — 36/41 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs36
open_issues48
closed_issues133
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d22
prs_decided_30d22
issue_closed_ratio0.735
closed_unmerged_prs5
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
18.2/25Owner reach — 337 followers of paiml
25/25Track record — 194 public repos, account ~9 yr old
Inputs used
followers337
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginpaiml
public_repos194
account_age_days3,585

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 2 package(s) on crates
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 9 days ago
20/20Version history — 386 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesruchy, ruchy-wasm
ecosystemscrates
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish9

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

90Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 8 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .clippy.toml, .eslintrc.json, .rustfmt.toml, Cargo.toml ([lints], [workspace.lints])
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 7 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
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://paiml.github.io/ruchy-book/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 9 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsdata, notebooks, repl, ruchy, rust, science, scripting, wasm, paiml-lang-ruchy
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://paiml.github.io/ruchy-book/
docs_sitehttps://paiml.github.io/ruchy-book/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

25At Risk · 16% of overall
How it's scored
0/7.5Binary-Artifacts — binaries present in source code
0.8/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 7 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
1.5/2.5Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
5/5Fuzzing — project is fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
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 — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 45 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate2.5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging. Remaining weights renormalized.

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.

82Excellent · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 95 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.95
agent_instruction_filesCLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes25,951
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile, justfile, tests/fixtures/release-policy/with-publish-via-make/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .clippy.toml, .eslintrc.json, .rustfmt.toml, Cargo.toml ([lints], [workspace.lints])
11/11Static type checking — Rust (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, Nix, lockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 57 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixyes
has_testsyes
lockfilesCargo.lock
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesMakefile, justfile, tests/fixtures/release-policy/with-publish-via-make/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.57
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml, examples/cargo_integration/Cargo.toml, fuzz/Cargo.toml, ruchy-embed/Cargo.toml, ruchy-wasm/Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Rust (statically typed)
53.7/55Manageable file sizes — 28/1,194 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes560,689
source_files_sampled1,194
oversized_source_files28
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)
20/20MCP server
40/40Runnable examples — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalyes
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_ofnetwork-service

Key facts

62GitHub stars
3contributors
2,964commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
48open issues
crates.io, npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Could not fetch crates package 'ruchy-embed' from its registry
  • Could not fetch npm package 'ruchy-wasm' from its registry
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 4 ⇿
0Stars
4Forks
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.

1223344412025-082026-012026-05
Major 1Minor 85Patch 12
OpenSSF Scorecard 2.5 / 10
2.5aggregate

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 · 2026-09-15 18:33 UTC

0Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
1Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests7 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
0Dangerous-Workflowdangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
10Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
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
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities45 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 65
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.iorand0.8Cargo.toml
crates.iotrueno0.65Cargo.toml
crates.ioaprender0.65Cargo.toml
crates.ioaprender_core0.65Cargo.toml
crates.ioalimentar0.4Cargo.toml
crates.ioentrenar0.65Cargo.toml
crates.iotrueno-viz0.65Cargo.toml
crates.iopresentar0.3.4Cargo.toml
crates.ioforjar1.25Cargo.toml
crates.iosimular0.65Cargo.toml
crates.iobashrs7.0Cargo.toml
crates.iowasm-encoder0.207.0Cargo.toml
crates.ioglob0.3Cargo.toml
crates.iowalkdir2.5Cargo.toml
crates.iorayon1.11Cargo.toml
crates.ioanyhow—Cargo.toml
crates.iothiserror—Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde—Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde_json—Cargo.toml
crates.iotracing—Cargo.toml
crates.iologos—Cargo.toml
crates.iosyn—Cargo.toml
crates.ioquote—Cargo.toml
crates.ioproc-macro2—Cargo.toml
crates.ioprettyplease—Cargo.toml
crates.ioclap4.5Cargo.toml
crates.ioregex1.11Cargo.toml
crates.iopolars0.55Cargo.toml
crates.iopolars-io0.55Cargo.toml
crates.ioarrow54.0Cargo.toml
crates.iouuid1.18Cargo.toml
crates.iocranelift—Cargo.toml
crates.iocranelift-codegen—Cargo.toml
crates.iocranelift-jit—Cargo.toml
crates.iocranelift-module—Cargo.toml
crates.iocranelift-native—Cargo.toml
crates.iopmcp1.3.0Cargo.toml
crates.iotokio1.47Cargo.toml
crates.iotokio-util0.7Cargo.toml
crates.ioasync-trait0.1Cargo.toml
crates.iosha20.10Cargo.toml
crates.iotoml0.9Cargo.toml
crates.iochrono0.4Cargo.toml
crates.iotower-lsp0.20Cargo.toml
crates.ioaxum0.8Cargo.toml
crates.iotower0.4Cargo.toml
crates.iotower-http0.5Cargo.toml
crates.iotempfile3.21Cargo.toml
crates.ioproptest1.7Cargo.toml
crates.ioreqwest0.12Cargo.toml
crates.iohtml5ever0.27Cargo.toml
crates.iomarkup5ever_rcdom0.3Cargo.toml
crates.iowasmparser0.244.0Cargo.toml
crates.iowasmtime47.0.3Cargo.toml
crates.iopulldown-cmark0.9Cargo.toml
crates.ioruchy5.0.0-beta.2ruchy-embed/Cargo.toml
crates.ioanyhow1ruchy-embed/Cargo.toml
crates.ioruchy5.0.0-beta.2ruchy-wasm/Cargo.toml
crates.iowasm-bindgen0.2ruchy-wasm/Cargo.toml
crates.iowasm-bindgen-futures0.4ruchy-wasm/Cargo.toml
crates.iojs-sys0.3ruchy-wasm/Cargo.toml
crates.ioconsole_error_panic_hook0.1ruchy-wasm/Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde1.0ruchy-wasm/Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde_json1.0ruchy-wasm/Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde-wasm-bindgen0.6ruchy-wasm/Cargo.toml
All dependencies not collected

The resolved dependency set could not be collected for this report: GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

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 — crates.io.