Public record
Software health reportschema 0.15.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-19 21:23 UTC

philosowaffle / peloton-to-garmin

Convert workout data from Peloton into JSON/TCX/FIT files and automatically upload to Garmin Connect

C# · HTML · SCSSGPL-3.0★ 360 stars⑂ 543 forkssince Dec 2017View on GitHub ↗

philosowaffle/peloton-to-garmin holds a health index of 48 out of 100, placing it in the Weak band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (62/100) and lowest on Security (37/100). It was last updated 100 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

48
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.

48
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 49 is calibrated to 48 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Bailey BelvisPersonal account
36 followers29 public repossince Apr 2014Strava

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

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

45Weak · 21% of overall
How it's scored
9.9/36Push recencylast push 100 days ago
5.5/36Commit cadence8/52 weeks with commits
11.1/18Commit volume16 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year16
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push100
active_weeks_last_year8
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases50 releases published
27/36Release recencylatest release 100 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~54.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count50
latest_release_tagv6.1.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release100
mean_days_between_releases54.2

Community & Adoption

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

62Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
41.4/60Stars360 stars
22.8/25Forks543 forks
7.6/15Watchers24 watchers
Inputs used
forks543
stars360
watchers24
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (GPL-3.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

51Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
2.1/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 91% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth25 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled25
top_contributor_share0.906
How it's scored
37.8/42Issue resolution90% of issues closed
23.8/30PR acceptance209/263 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 2/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs209
open_issues35
closed_issues316
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.9
closed_unmerged_prs54
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.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
11.3/25Owner reach36 followers of philosowaffle
22.8/25Track record29 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers36
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginphilosowaffle
public_repos29
account_age_days4,481
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

46Weak · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows5 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
4/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests3 out of 15 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsno
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://philosowaffle.github.io/peloton-to-garmin/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics7 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicspeloton-workouts, convert-workout-data, tcx, garmin, fit, peloton, garmin-connect
has_wikino
homepagehttps://philosowaffle.github.io/peloton-to-garmin/
docs_sitehttps://philosowaffle.github.io/peloton-to-garmin/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

37Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0.5/2.5CI-Tests3 out of 15 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 2/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
1.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
0/7.5Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate3.7
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.

56Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsCLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share
agent_instruction_filesCLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes14,523
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingC# (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentDockerfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
0/8Automated maintenanceno data
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfiles
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeC# (statically typed)
52.1/55Manageable file sizes17/325 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageC#
largest_source_bytes1,626,252
source_files_sampled325
oversized_source_files17

Key facts

360GitHub stars
25contributors
16commits, last 12 months
100days since last push
50releases
1bus factor
35open issues
package ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.7 / 10
3.7aggregate

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 · 2026-07-19 21:23 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2CI-Tests3 out of 15 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 2/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
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
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 56

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 56 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npmautoprefixer^10.4.7indirect
npmbootstrap5.2.0-beta1indirect
npmcross-env^7.0.3indirect
npmeslint^8.19.0indirect
npmfantasticon^1.2.3indirect
npmfind-unused-sass-variables^4.0.4indirect
npmhugo-bin^0.89.0indirect
npmlockfile-lint^4.7.6indirect
npmnpm-run-all^4.1.5indirect
npmpicocolors^1.0.0indirect
npmpostcss^8.4.14indirect
npmpostcss-cli^10.0.0indirect
npmpurgecss^4.1.3indirect
npmstylelint^14.9.1indirect
npmstylelint-config-twbs-bootstrap^4.0.0indirect
npmsvg-sprite^2.0.0-beta7indirect
npmsvgo^2.8.0indirect
npmvnu-jar21.10.12indirect
NuGetBogus35.6.2indirect
NuGetFluentAssertions8.1.1indirect
NuGetFlurl4.0.0indirect
NuGetFlurl.Http4.0.2indirect
NuGetGarmin.FIT.Sdk21.158.0indirect
NuGetHandlebars.Net2.1.6indirect
NuGetHavit.Blazor.Components.Web.Bootstrap4.7.13indirect
NuGetHtmlAgilityPack1.12.4indirect
NuGetJsonFlatFileDataStore2.4.2indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components.Web9.0.3indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components.WebView.Maui9.0.50indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Maui.Controls9.0.50indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.NET.Test.Sdk17.13.0indirect
NuGetMoq4.20.72indirect
NuGetMoq.AutoMock3.5.0indirect
NuGetMSTest.TestFramework3.8.2indirect
NuGetNUnit4.3.2indirect
NuGetNUnit3TestAdapter5.0.0indirect
NuGetOAuth.DotNetCore3.0.1indirect
NuGetOpenTelemetry.Exporter.Jaeger1.5.1indirect
NuGetOpenTelemetry.Extensions.Hosting1.11.2indirect
NuGetOpenTelemetry.Instrumentation.AspNetCore1.11.1indirect
NuGetOpenTelemetry.Instrumentation.Http1.11.1indirect
NuGetPhilosowaffle.Capability.ReleaseChecks2.0.0indirect
NuGetPolly8.5.2indirect
NuGetprometheus-net8.2.1indirect
NuGetprometheus-net.AspNetCore8.2.1indirect
NuGetprometheus-net.DotNetRuntime4.4.1indirect
NuGetSerilog4.2.0indirect
NuGetSerilog.AspNetCore9.0.0indirect
NuGetSerilog.Enrichers.Span3.1.0indirect
NuGetSerilog.Settings.Configuration9.0.0indirect
NuGetSerilog.Sinks.Console6.0.0indirect
NuGetSerilog.Sinks.File6.0.0indirect
NuGetSerilog.Sinks.File.Header1.0.2indirect
NuGetSerilog.Sinks.Grafana.Loki8.3.0indirect
NuGetSwashbuckle.AspNetCore7.3.1indirect
NuGetSystem.Text.Json9.0.3indirect
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 v0.15.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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