Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-12 10:30 UTC

paulfitz / daff

align and compare tables

JavaMIT★ 924 stars⑂ 77 forkssince Jan 2013View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

paulfitz/daff holds a health index of 42 out of 100, placing it in the Weak band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (63/100) and lowest on Vitality (27/100). It was last updated 108 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

42
overall / 100
Weak

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.

42
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 50 is calibrated to 50 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Paul FitzpatrickPersonal account
196 followers148 public repossince Aug 2009Grist Labs

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
npmdaff1.4.213,04270495 days agotablediffpatchmerge

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

27At Risk · 21% of overall
How it's scored
9.9/36Push recency — last push 108 days ago
0/36Commit cadence — 0/52 weeks with commits
0/18Commit volume — 0 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year0
human_commit_share0.99
days_since_last_push108
active_weeks_last_year0
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 21 releases published
7.2/36Release recency — latest release 495 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~270.7 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count21
latest_release_tagv1.4.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release495
mean_days_between_releases270.7
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?

63Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
48.1/60Stars — 924 stars
15.7/25Forks — 77 forks
7.4/15Watchers — 22 watchers
Inputs used
forks77
stars924
watchers22
growth_stateorganic
growth_factor_pct100
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges4
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesbadge.fury.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
54.9/80Monthly downloads — 13,042 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesdaff
dependents—
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads13,042
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?

58Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
1.1/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 95% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 18 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 8 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled18
top_contributor_share0.951
How it's scored
27.2/42Issue resolution — 65% of issues closed
26.8/30PR acceptance — 84/94 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
3/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 6/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
merged_prs84
open_issues43
closed_issues79
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.648
closed_unmerged_prs10
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
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
16.5/25Owner reach — 196 followers of paulfitz
25/25Track record — 148 public repos, account ~17 yr old
Inputs used
followers196
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginpaulfitz
public_repos148
account_age_days6,229
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on npm
14/35Publish recency — latest publish 495 days ago
20/20Version history — 70 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesdaff
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish495

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

55Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 0 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://paulfitz.github.io/daff
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 5 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicscsv, csv-diffs, diff, comparing-tables, sqlite
has_wikino
homepagehttps://paulfitz.github.io/daff
docs_sitehttps://paulfitz.github.io/daff
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

47Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests — 0 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1.5/7.5Code-Review — Found 6/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 8 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
0/7.5Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
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
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 11 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate3.4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories11
affected_packages3
assessed_packages20
unassessed_packages2
affected_by_severityhigh 3
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 20 resolved dependencies against OSV. 2 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
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
21/40Legible commit history — 39 of 99 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.394
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — Java (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
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
lockfilespackage-lock.json
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestspackaging/java/pom.xml
dependency_bot_commit_share0.01
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Java (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/55 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJava
largest_source_bytes10,886
source_files_sampled55
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

924GitHub stars
18contributors
0commits, last 12 months
108days since last push
21releases
1bus factor
43open issues
npm, PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Star history carried forward from 2026-07-17: GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository admins, so it can no longer be collected. The repository has 924 stars today.

More detail

Star and fork history 920 ★ / 77 ⇿
920Stars
77Forks
21Releases

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.

Star history is shown as collected on 2026-07-17. GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository administrators in July 2026, so this series can no longer be extended; the current star total above remains live.

02004006008001,00092077462013-072020-012026-07
Major 0Minor 0Patch 21

Each point covers 12 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.4 / 10
3.4aggregate

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 · 2026-09-12 10:29 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2Code-ReviewFound 6/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
10Contributorsproject has 8 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
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
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities11 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 22

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 22 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-compiler-plugin3.10.1indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-deploy-plugin3.0.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-jar-plugin3.2.2indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-javadoc-plugin—indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-javadoc-plugin3.2.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-source-plugin—indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-source-plugin3.2.1indirect
Mavenorg.codehaus.mojo:build-helper-maven-plugin3.4.0indirect
Mavenorg.jreleaser:jreleaser-maven-plugin1.8.0indirect
npmbalanced-match1.0.0indirect
npmbrace-expansion1.1.11indirect
npmconcat-map0.0.1indirect
npmfs.realpath1.0.0indirect
npmglob7.1.6indirect
npminflight1.0.6indirect
npminherits2.0.4indirect
npmminimatch3.0.4indirect
npmonce1.4.0indirect
npmpath-is-absolute1.0.1indirect
npmrimraf3.0.2indirect
npmtmp0.2.1indirect
npmwrappy1.0.2indirect
Dependency advisories 3

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 20 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 3 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 2 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
brace-expansion1.1.11indirecthigh55.0.9
minimatch3.0.4indirecthigh410.2.3
tmp0.2.1indirecthigh20.2.6

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 — npm.