# pig-mesh/nacos — health index 48/100 (At risk)

> Inspection of the public repository pig-mesh/nacos by inspect.software. It holds a health index of 48 out of 100, placing it in the At risk band. The index is a signal derived from publicly visible practice, not a warranty, a security audit, or an endorsement, and it is independent of payment.

- Repository: https://github.com/pig-mesh/nacos
- Report page: https://inspect.software/software/pig-mesh/nacos
- Full JSON report: https://inspect.software/api/repositories/pig-mesh/nacos/report
- Badge: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/inspect-software/badges/main/v1/p/pig-mesh/nacos.svg
- Inspected: 2026-07-17
- Methodology: metrics 1.13.0, report schema 0.11.0 (https://inspect.software/methodology.md)

## Category summary

| Category | Weight | Index | Band |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vitality | 22% | 39/100 | At risk |
| Community & Adoption | 18% | 12/100 | Critical |
| Sustainability & Governance | 24% | 85/100 | Excellent |
| Engineering Quality | 20% | 62/100 | Moderate |
| Security | 16% | 30/100 | At risk |
| AI Readiness | not counted | 88/100 | Excellent |

## Repository facts

| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Description | an easy-to-use dynamic service discovery, configuration and service management platform for building AI cloud native applications. |
| Homepage | https://nacos.io |
| Primary language | Java |
| License | Apache-2.0 |
| Stars | 0 |
| Forks | 0 |
| Created | 2026-04-27 |
| Last push | 2026-06-14 |
| Commits (last year) | 593 |
| Bus factor | 8 |
| Fork | yes |

## Published packages

| Registry | Package | Latest | Monthly downloads |
|---|---|---|---|
| maven | io.github.pig-mesh.nacos:nacos-ai | 3.2.2 | — |
| maven | io.github.pig-mesh.nacos:nacos-api | 3.2.2 | — |
| maven | io.github.pig-mesh.nacos:nacos-auth | 3.2.2 | — |
| maven | io.github.pig-mesh.nacos:nacos-client-basic | 3.2.2 | — |
| maven | io.github.pig-mesh.nacos:nacos-client | 3.2.2 | — |
| maven | io.github.pig-mesh.nacos:nacos-cmdb | 3.2.2 | — |
| maven | io.github.pig-mesh.nacos:nacos-common | 3.2.2 | — |
| maven | io.github.pig-mesh.nacos:nacos-config | 3.2.2 | — |

## Vitality — 39/100 (At risk)

Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping? Weight: 22% of the overall index.

### Development activity — 65/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Push recency | partial | 18 / 36 | last push 32 days ago |
| Commit cadence | partial | 29.1 / 36 | 42/52 weeks with commits |
| Commit volume | met | 18 / 18 | 593 commits in the last year |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained | not met | 0 / 10 | project was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully |

### Release discipline — 1/100 (Critical)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ships releases | not met | 0 / 27 | no releases published |
| Release recency | not met | 0 / 36 | no releases |
| Release cadence | not met | 0 / 27 | no releases |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases | excluded | 0 / 10 | no releases found |

### Abandonment — 100/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Project is still maintained | met | 100 / 100 | maintenance record not established from the collected data |

## Community & Adoption — 12/100 (Critical)

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors? Weight: 18% of the overall index.

### Popularity & adoption — 1/100 (Critical)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stars | not met | 0 / 60 | 0 stars |
| Forks | not met | 0 / 25 | 0 forks |
| Watchers | not met | 0 / 15 | 0 watchers |

### Community health — 25/100 (Critical)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | not met | 0 / 22.5 | — |
| License | met | 22.5 / 22.5 | recognized license (Apache-2.0) |
| CONTRIBUTING guide | not met | 0 / 18 | — |
| Code of conduct | not met | 0 / 13.5 | — |
| Issue template | not met | 0 / 7.2 | — |
| PR template | not met | 0 / 6.3 | — |

## Sustainability & Governance — 85/100 (Excellent)

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep? Weight: 24% of the overall index.

### Maintainer resilience (bus factor) — 96/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bus factor | met | 54 / 54 | 8 contributor(s) cover half of all commits |
| Commit distribution | partial | 18.2 / 22.5 | top contributor authored 19% of commits |
| Contributor breadth | met | 13.5 / 13.5 | 100 contributors |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors | met | 10 / 10 | project has 24 contributing companies or organizations |

### Issue & PR responsiveness — 72/100 (Good)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Issue resolution | excluded | 0 / 46.8 | no issues or no data |
| PR acceptance | met | 38.2 / 38.2 | 1/1 decided PRs merged |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review | not met | 0 / 15 | Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0 |

### Ownership & stewardship — 74/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership backing | met | 30 / 30 | organization-owned |
| Verified domain | not met | 0 / 20 | — |
| Owner reach | partial | 19.5 / 25 | 508 followers of pig-mesh |
| Track record | partial | 25 / 25 | 74 public repos, account ~5 yr old |

### Package maintenance — 100/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Published & resolvable | met | 25 / 25 | 8 package(s) on maven |
| Publish recency | met | 35 / 35 | latest publish 47 days ago |
| Version history | met | 20 / 20 | 12 published versions |
| Not deprecated | met | 20 / 20 | active, not deprecated or yanked |

## Engineering Quality — 62/100 (Moderate)

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place? Weight: 20% of the overall index.

### Engineering practices — 70/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| CI workflows | met | 24 / 24 | 10 workflow(s) |
| Tests present | met | 24 / 24 | — |
| Linter config | met | 16 / 16 | .eslintrc, eslint.config.js |
| Pre-commit hooks | not met | 0 / 9.6 | — |
| .editorconfig | met | 6.4 / 6.4 | — |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests | not met | 0 / 20 | 0 out of 1 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0 |

### Documentation — 50/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | not met | 0 / 30 | — |
| Documentation directory | met | 25 / 25 | — |
| Documentation / homepage site | met | 15 / 15 | https://nacos.io |
| Repository description | not met | 0 / 10 | — |
| Topics | not met | 0 / 10 | — |
| Wiki | met | 10 / 10 | — |

## Security — 30/100 (At risk)

Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, with no malicious dependency and no unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure? Weight: 16% of the overall index.

### Security posture — 30/100 (At risk)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Binary-Artifacts | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | no binaries found in the repo |
| Branch-Protection | not met | 0 / 7.5 | branch protection not enabled on development/release branches |
| CI-Tests | not met | 0 / 2.5 | 0 out of 1 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0 |
| CII-Best-Practices | not met | 0 / 2.5 | no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected |
| Code-Review | not met | 0 / 7.5 | Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0 |
| Contributors | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | project has 24 contributing companies or organizations |
| Dangerous-Workflow | met | 10 / 10 | no dangerous workflow patterns detected |
| Dependency-Update-Tool | not met | 0 / 7.5 | no update tool detected |
| Fuzzing | met | 5 / 5 | project is fuzzed |
| License | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | license file detected |
| Maintained | not met | 0 / 7.5 | project was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully |
| Packaging | excluded | 0 / 5 | packaging workflow not detected |
| Pinned-Dependencies | partial | 0.5 / 5 | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1 |
| SAST | not met | 0 / 5 | SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0 |
| Security-Policy | not met | 0 / 5 | security policy file not detected |
| Signed-Releases | excluded | 0 / 7.5 | no releases found |
| Token-Permissions | not met | 0 / 7.5 | detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions |
| Vulnerabilities | not met | 0 / 7.5 | 103 existing vulnerabilities detected |

### High-Risk Jurisdiction Exposure — 100/100 (Excellent)

Only high-confidence self-published location evidence affects this multiplier. Ambiguous matches are review-only; country evidence is not proof of nationality, citizenship, legal registration, malicious intent, or sanctions status.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Policy exposure multiplier | met | 100 / 100 | no confirmed policy-scope location match |

## AI Readiness — 88/100 (Excellent)

How well is the repo equipped to be developed and maintained with AI coding agents? An independent, experimental badge — weight 0.0, so it is surfaced on its own and does not affect the overall health score.

### Agent context & guidance — 75/100 (Good)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agent instructions | met | 45 / 45 | AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md |
| Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) | not met | 0 / 15 | — |
| Legible commit history | excluded | 0 / 40 | no data |

### Verify loop (build / test / typecheck) — 89/100 (Excellent)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| One-command bootstrap | met | 18 / 18 | Makefile |
| Automated tests | met | 22 / 22 | — |
| Lint / format config | met | 11 / 11 | .eslintrc, eslint.config.js |
| Static type checking | met | 11 / 11 | console-ui-next/tsconfig.json, console-ui/tsconfig.json |
| Reproducible environment | met | 10 / 10 | Dockerfile, lockfile |
| Demonstrated agent practice | excluded | 0 / 10 | no data |
| Automated maintenance | excluded | 0 / 8 | no data |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies | partial | 1 / 10 | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1 |

### Code legibility for models — 99/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type-checkable code | met | 45 / 45 | Java (statically typed) |
| Manageable file sizes | partial | 54.3 / 55 | 63/5161 source files over 60KB |

### Machine-readable interfaces — 100/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) | met | 40 / 40 | api/src/main/proto/nacos_grpc_service.proto, consistency/src/main/proto/Data.proto, consistency/src/main/proto/consistency.proto, istio/src/main/resources/proto/gogoproto/gogo.proto, istio/src/main/resources/proto/google/protobuf/any.proto, istio/src/main/resources/proto/mcp/v1alpha1/mcp.proto, istio/src/main/resources/proto/mcp/v1alpha1/metadata.proto, istio/src/main/resources/proto/mcp/v1alpha1/resource.proto, istio/src/main/resources/proto/networking/v1alpha3/destination_rule.proto, istio/src/main/resources/proto/networking/v1alpha3/envoy_filter.proto, istio/src/main/resources/proto/networking/v1alpha3/gateway.proto, istio/src/main/resources/proto/networking/v1alpha3/service_entry.proto, istio/src/main/resources/proto/networking/v1alpha3/sidecar.proto, istio/src/main/resources/proto/networking/v1alpha3/virtual_service.proto, istio/src/main/resources/proto/networking/v1alpha3/workload_entry.proto, istio/src/main/resources/proto/networking/v1alpha3/workload_group.proto |
| MCP server | met | 20 / 20 | — |
| Runnable examples | met | 40 / 40 | sample |

## Collection warnings

- Community profile unavailable
- GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

## What this report is

inspect.software measures public repositories against a single published, versioned methodology and reports the result as a 1–100 health index. Findings are signals derived from what is visible in public repository data — they are not a security audit, a warranty, or an endorsement, and no result depends on payment.

- Methodology, formulas and weights: https://inspect.software/methodology.md
- What a result does and does not claim: https://inspect.software/wiki/signals-not-warranties.md
- Rating bands: https://inspect.software/wiki/scoring-bands.md
- Corrections: https://inspect.software/contact.md
- Index of all documents: https://inspect.software/llms.txt