Public record
Software health reportschema 0.11.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-17 13:07 UTC

po-ui / po-style

Tema padrão do PO UI.

HTML · CSSMIT★ 86 stars⑂ 41 forkssince Jun 2019View on GitHub ↗

po-ui/po-style holds a health index of 87 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (95/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (36/100). It was last updated today. 6 contributors account for most of its recent work.

87
overall / 100
Excellent

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.

87
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 73 is calibrated to 87 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

PO UIOrganization
305 followers10 public repossince Mar 2019

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
npm@po-ui/style21.23.124,6463972 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

95Exceptional · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
35.3/36Commit cadence51/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume134 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year134
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year51
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases100 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recencylatest release 2 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~6.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv21.23.1
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release2
mean_days_between_releases6.8
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?

61Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
31.3/60Stars86 stars
13.4/25Forks41 forks
4.7/15Watchers8 watchers
Inputs used
forks41
stars86
watchers8
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
58.6/80Monthly downloads24,646 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packages@po-ui/style
dependents
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads
monthly_downloads24,646
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?

86Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
48.6/54Bus factor6 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
19.6/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 13% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth39 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 8 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor6
contributors_sampled39
top_contributor_share0.128
How it's scored
16.8/42Issue resolution40% of issues closed
28.3/30PR acceptance885/939 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
15/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
Inputs used
merged_prs885
open_issues3
closed_issues2
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.4
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
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
17.9/25Owner reach305 followers of po-ui
19.6/25Track record10 public repos, account ~7 yr old
Inputs used
followers305
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginpo-ui
public_repos10
account_age_days2,674
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 2 days ago
20/20Version history397 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packages@po-ui/style
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish2

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

69Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows7 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
18/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests27 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsno
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://po-ui.io/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics1 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicshacktoberfest
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://po-ui.io/
docs_sitehttps://po-ui.io/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

55Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
2.2/2.5CI-Tests27 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7.5/7.5Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 8 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflowdangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
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-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate5.5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, 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.

36Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions.github/instructions/agents-instructions.md, AGENTS.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_files.github/instructions/agents-instructions.md, AGENTS.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes6,295
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
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
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_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
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
0/45Type-checkable codeHTML without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/10 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageHTML
largest_source_bytes10,802
source_files_sampled10
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
20/20MCP server
0/40Runnable examples
Inputs used
example_dirs
has_mcp_signalyes
api_schema_files
interfaces_expected_of
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto). Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

86GitHub stars
39contributors
134commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
100releases
6bus factor
3open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.5 / 10
5.5aggregate

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 · 2026-07-17 13:06 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal error: error during branchesHandler.setup: internal error: some github tokens can't read classic branch protection rules: https://github.com/ossf/scorecard-action/blob/main/docs/authentication/fine-grained-auth-token.md
9CI-Tests27 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
10Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
10Contributorsproject has 8 contributing companies or organizations
0Dangerous-Workflowdangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow 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
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 38

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 38 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@animaliads/animalia-icon^1.1.0indirect
npm@commitlint/cli^11.0.0indirect
npm@commitlint/config-angular^11.0.0indirect
npm@po-ui/style^14.0.0indirect
npmautoprefixer^9.8.6indirect
npmchalk2.4.2indirect
npmcommander3.0.2indirect
npmcross-spawn7.0.1indirect
npmcssnano^4.1.10indirect
npmdel^5.1.0indirect
npmdel^6.0.0indirect
npmdriver.js^1.4.0indirect
npmgulp4.0.2indirect
npmgulp-concat^2.6.1indirect
npmgulp-copy^4.0.1indirect
npmgulp-minify^3.1.0indirect
npmgulp-postcss^10.0.0indirect
npmgulp-postcss^8.0.0indirect
npmgulp-rename^1.4.0indirect
npmgulp-rename^2.0.0indirect
npmgulp-tap^2.0.0indirect
npmhttp-server^0.12.3indirect
npmhusky^4.2.5indirect
npminquirer7.0.0indirect
npmpostcss^8.4.45indirect
npmpostcss-apply^0.12.0indirect
npmpostcss-custom-properties^9.0.2indirect
npmpostcss-custom-properties^9.1.1indirect
npmpostcss-import^12.0.1indirect
npmpostcss-nested^4.2.3indirect
npmpostcss-simple-vars^7.0.1indirect
npmprettier2.2.0indirect
npmpretty-quick^3.1.0indirect
npmshelljs0.8.5indirect
npmstandard-version^9.0.0indirect
npmxml2js0.6.2indirect
npmyargs^14.2.0indirect
npmyargs^16.1.1indirect
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 v0.11.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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