Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-10 01:43 UTC

po-ui / po-style

Tema padrão do PO UI.

HTML · CSSMIT★ 85 stars⑂ 41 forkssince Jun 2019View on GitHub ↗

po-ui/po-style holds a health index of 88 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (94/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (47/100). It was last updated today. 6 contributors account for most of its recent work.

88
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.

88
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 74 is calibrated to 88 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

PO UIOrganization
313 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/style21.30.121,5134098 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

94Exceptional · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
33.9/36Commit cadence — 49/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 125 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 26 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year125
human_commit_share0.97
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year49
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases — 100 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recency — latest release 8 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~6.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv21.30.1
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release8
mean_days_between_releases6.3
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?

60Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
31.2/60Stars — 85 stars
13.4/25Forks — 41 forks
4.7/15Watchers — 8 watchers
Inputs used
forks41
stars85
watchers8
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized 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_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
57.8/80Monthly downloads — 21,513 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packages@po-ui/style
dependents—
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads21,513
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?

82Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
48.6/54Bus factor — 6 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
19.7/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 13% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 37 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 8 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor6
contributors_sampled37
top_contributor_share0.126
How it's scored
16.8/42Issue resolution — 40% of issues closed
28.3/30PR acceptance — 904/959 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
15/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
Inputs used
merged_prs904
open_issues3
closed_issues2
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d8
prs_decided_30d9
issue_closed_ratio0.4
closed_unmerged_prs55
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
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
18/25Owner reach — 313 followers of po-ui
19.6/25Track record — 10 public repos, account ~7 yr old
Inputs used
followers313
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginpo-ui
public_repos10
account_age_days2,729

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 8 days ago
20/20Version history — 409 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packages@po-ui/style
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish8

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

69Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 8 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
18/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 28 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 site — https://po-ui.io/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 1 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?

64Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2.2/2.5CI-Tests — 28 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7.5/7.5Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 8 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — 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
7.5/7.5Maintained — 26 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
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
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 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.

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
advisories1
affected_packages1
assessed_packages8
unassessed_packages30
affected_by_severityhigh 1
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 8 resolved dependencies against OSV. 30 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.

47Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — .github/instructions/agents-instructions.md, AGENTS.md
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://po-ui.io/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 96 of 97 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://po-ui.io/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.99
agent_instruction_files.github/instructions/agents-instructions.md, AGENTS.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes6,295
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 5 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency 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_share0.05
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — HTML without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/10 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

85GitHub stars
37contributors
125commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
100releases
6bus factor
3open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 41 ⇿
0Stars
41Forks
82Releases

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.

0102030403932019-092023-012026-06
Major 2Minor 56Patch 24

Each point covers 7 days.

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 · 2026-09-10 01:42 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-Tests28 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
10Maintained26 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
Dependency advisories 1

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 8 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 1 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 30 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
cross-spawn7.0.1indirecthigh17.0.5

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.