Public record
Software health reportschema 0.11.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-17 01:28 UTC

pboling / gem_bench

🪑 Benchmark different versions of same or similar gems & Static Gemfile and installed gem library source code analysis

RubyMIT★ 94 stars⑂ 5 forkssince Apr 2013View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryhow this is determined
#benchmark#benchmarking#bundler#rubygem#rubygems

pboling/gem_bench holds a health index of 53 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (68/100) and lowest on Vitality (30/100). It was last updated 180 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

53
overall / 100
Moderate

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.

53
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 52 is calibrated to 53 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Galtzo Open SourceOrganization
5 followers60 public repossince May 2025

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
RubyGemsgem_bench2.0.5-19663 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

30At Risk · 21% of overall

Development activity

16Critical
How it's scored
9.9/36Push recency — last push 180 days ago
1.4/36Commit cadence — 2/52 weeks with commits
4.3/18Commit volume — 2 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_year2
human_commit_share—
days_since_last_push180
active_weeks_last_year2

Release discipline

52Moderate
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 1 releases published
7.2/36Release recency — latest release 663 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — cadence unknown (single release)
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count1
latest_release_tagv2.0.5
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release663
mean_days_between_releases—
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?

66Good · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

39Weak
How it's scored
31.9/60Stars — 94 stars
5/25Forks — 5 forks
1.7/15Watchers — 3 watchers
Inputs used
forks5
stars94
watchers3
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_badges—
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

84Excellent
How it's scored
67.2/80Total downloads — 2,955,986 downloads all-time across rubygems
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesgem_bench
dependents—
ecosystemsrubygems
total_downloads2,955,986
monthly_downloads—
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?

57Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

34At Risk
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
2.3/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 90% of commits
12.2/13.5Contributor breadth — 9 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 18 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled9
top_contributor_share0.897

Issue & PR responsiveness

60Moderate
How it's scored
37.3/42Issue resolution — 89% of issues closed
14.7/30PR acceptance — 23/47 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/26 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs23
open_issues1
closed_issues8
prs_merged_7d—
prs_decided_7d—
prs_merged_30d—
prs_decided_30d—
issue_closed_ratio0.889
closed_unmerged_prs24
first_time_authors_30d—
first_time_prs_merged_30d—
first_time_prs_decided_30d—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

64Moderate
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain — verified-domain status not read for this organization
5.6/25Owner reach — 5 followers of galtzo-floss
15.3/25Track record — 60 public repos, account ~1 yr old
Inputs used
followers5
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified—
owner_logingaltzo-floss
public_repos60
account_age_days417
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

79Good
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on rubygems
14/35Publish recency — latest publish 663 days ago
20/20Version history — 19 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesgem_bench
ecosystemsrubygems
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish663

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

68Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

64Moderate
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 8 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .rubocop.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 0 out of 2 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

75Good
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — http://railsbling.com/gem_bench
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 5 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsbenchmark, benchmarking, bundler, rubygem, rubygems
has_wikiyes
homepagehttp://railsbling.com/gem_bench
docs_sitehttp://railsbling.com/gem_bench
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

Security posture

47Weak
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 2 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
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/26 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 18 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
3.5/5SAST — SAST tool detected but not run on all commits
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
5.2/7.5Vulnerabilities — 3 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate4.7
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. 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.

35Weak · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

1Critical
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — no data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share—
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

53Moderate
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .rubocop.yml
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no data
5/8Automated maintenance — dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesGemfile.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share—
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice. Remaining weights renormalized.

Code legibility for models

55Moderate
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Ruby without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/26 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRuby
largest_source_bytes16,207
source_files_sampled26
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

94GitHub stars
9contributors
2commits, last 12 months
180days since last push
1releases
1bus factor
1open issues
RubyGemspackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.7 / 10
4.7aggregate

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 · 2026-07-17 01:28 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 2 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/26 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 18 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
7SASTSAST tool detected but not run on all commits
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7Vulnerabilities3 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 3
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
RubyGemsbundler—Gemfile
RubyGemsbyebug—Gemfile
RubyGemstest-unit~> 3.6Gemfile
All dependencies 73

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 3 direct and 70 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
RubyGemsbundler—direct
RubyGemsbyebug11.1.3direct
RubyGemstest-unit3.6.2direct
RubyGemsansi1.5.0indirect
RubyGemsast2.4.2indirect
RubyGemsbackports3.25.0indirect
RubyGemscoderay1.1.3indirect
RubyGemsdiff-lcs1.5.1indirect
RubyGemsdiffy3.4.2indirect
RubyGemsdocile1.4.1indirect
RubyGemsjson2.7.2indirect
RubyGemskettle-soup-cover—indirect
RubyGemskettle-soup-cover1.0.4indirect
RubyGemslanguage_server-protocol3.17.0.3indirect
RubyGemslint_roller1.1.0indirect
RubyGemsmethod_source—indirect
RubyGemsmethod_source1.1.0indirect
RubyGemsostruct0.6.0indirect
RubyGemsparallel1.26.3indirect
RubyGemsparser3.3.5.0indirect
RubyGemspower_assert2.0.3indirect
RubyGemspry0.14.2indirect
RubyGemspry-byebug3.10.1indirect
RubyGemsracc1.8.1indirect
RubyGemsrainbow3.1.1indirect
RubyGemsrake—indirect
RubyGemsrake13.2.1indirect
RubyGemsregexp_parser2.9.2indirect
RubyGemsrexml3.3.9indirect
RubyGemsrspec—indirect
RubyGemsrspec3.13.0indirect
RubyGemsrspec-block_is_expected—indirect
RubyGemsrspec-block_is_expected1.0.6indirect
RubyGemsrspec-core3.13.1indirect
RubyGemsrspec-expectations3.13.3indirect
RubyGemsrspec-mocks3.13.1indirect
RubyGemsrspec-support3.13.1indirect
RubyGemsrubocop1.65.1indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-ast1.32.3indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-gradual0.3.6indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-lts—indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-lts10.1.1indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-md1.2.3indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-packaging—indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-packaging0.5.2indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-performance1.21.1indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-rake0.6.0indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-rspec—indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-rspec3.0.5indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-ruby2_32.0.5indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-shopify2.15.1indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-thread_safety0.5.1indirect
RubyGemsruby-progressbar1.13.0indirect
RubyGemssimplecov0.22.0indirect
RubyGemssimplecov-cobertura2.1.0indirect
RubyGemssimplecov-console0.9.2indirect
RubyGemssimplecov-html0.13.1indirect
RubyGemssimplecov-lcov0.8.0indirect
RubyGemssimplecov-rcov0.3.7indirect
RubyGemssimplecov_json_formatter0.1.4indirect
RubyGemsstandard—indirect
RubyGemsstandard1.40.0indirect
RubyGemsstandard-custom1.0.2indirect
RubyGemsstandard-performance1.4.0indirect
RubyGemsstandard-rubocop-lts1.0.10indirect
RubyGemsterminal-table3.0.2indirect
RubyGemsunicode-display_width2.6.0indirect
RubyGemsversion_gem—indirect
RubyGemsversion_gem1.1.4indirect
RubyGemsyard—indirect
RubyGemsyard0.9.37indirect
RubyGemsyard-junk—indirect
RubyGemsyard-junk0.0.10indirect
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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with pboling/gem_bench. Read them side by side →

88karafka/waterdropStandalone Karafka library for producing Kafka messagesExcellent73appraisal-rb/appraisal2🔍️ A Ruby library for testing your library against different versions of dependencies managed by bundler or OREGood44piotrmurach/benchmark-trendMeasure performance trends of Ruby codeWeak41piotrmurach/benchmark-mallocTrace memory allocations and collect statsWeak38piotrmurach/benchmark-perfBenchmark execution time and iterations per secondWeak94dotnet/BenchmarkDotNetPowerful .NET library for benchmarkingExceptional

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 v0.11.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics — RubyGems.