Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-13 00:53 UTC

poweradmin / external-dns-poweradmin-webhook

ExternalDNS webhook provider for Poweradmin to synchronize Kubernetes DNS records

GoMIT★ 3 stars⑂ 2 forkssince Dec 2025View on GitHub ↗

#dns #external-dns #kubernetes #poweradmin #powerdns

poweradmin/external-dns-poweradmin-webhook holds a health index of 77 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (91/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (26/100). It was last updated 6 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

overall / 100

Good

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.

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)

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 66 is calibrated to 77 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

PoweradminOrganization

26 followers10 public repossince Nov 2011

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

Package ecosystems

Registry	Package	Version	Downloads / mo	Versions	Last publish
Go	github.com/poweradmin/external-dns-poweradmin-webhook	v1.4.15	-	33	6 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

91Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

86Excellent

How it's scored

36/36	Push recency — last push 6 days ago
22.2/36	Commit cadence — 32/52 weeks with commits
18/18	Commit volume — 281 commits in the last year
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

commits_last_year	281
human_commit_share	0.37
days_since_last_push	6
active_weeks_last_year	32

Release discipline

98Exceptional

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 33 releases published
36/36	Release recency — latest release 6 days ago
27/27	Release cadence — a release every ~2.5 days
8/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — 5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.

Inputs used

releases_count	33
latest_release_tag	v1.4.15
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	6
mean_days_between_releases	2.5

Community & Adoption

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

26At Risk · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

5Critical

How it's scored

4.9/60	Stars — 3 stars
0/25	Forks — 2 forks
0/15	Watchers — 1 watchers

Inputs used

forks	2
stars	3
watchers	1
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

50Moderate

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
22.5/22.5	License — recognized license (MIT)
0/18	CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5	Code of conduct
0/7.2	Issue template
0/6.3	PR template

Inputs used

has_readme	yes
has_license	yes
readme_badges	5
has_contributing	no
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	no
readme_badge_services	github.com, goreportcard.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_template	no

Sustainability & Governance

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

59Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

13Critical

How it's scored

9/54	Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5	Contributor breadth — 1 contributors
3/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3

Inputs used

bus_factor	1
contributors_sampled	1
top_contributor_share	1

Issue & PR responsiveness

79Good

How it's scored

42/42	Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
27.1/30	PR acceptance — 140/155 decided PRs merged
0/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/4 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

merged_prs	140
open_issues	0
closed_issues	2
prs_merged_7d	0
prs_decided_7d	0
prs_merged_30d	8
prs_decided_30d	8
issue_closed_ratio	1
closed_unmerged_prs	15
first_time_authors_30d	0
first_time_prs_merged_30d	0
first_time_prs_decided_30d	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

60Moderate

How it's scored

30/30	Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20	Verified domain
10.3/25	Owner reach — 26 followers of poweradmin
19.6/25	Track record — 10 public repos, account ~14 yr old

Inputs used

followers	26
owner_type	Organization
is_verified	no
owner_login	poweradmin
public_repos	10
account_age_days	5,427

Package maintenance

100Exceptional

How it's scored

25/25	Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on go
35/35	Publish recency — latest publish 6 days ago
20/20	Version history — 33 published versions
20/20	Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked

Inputs used

packages	github.com/poweradmin/external-dns-poweradmin-webhook
ecosystems	go
any_deprecated	no
min_days_since_publish	6

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

69Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

82Excellent

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 5 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
16/16	Linter config — .golangci.yaml
0/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4	.editorconfig
18/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 28 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9

Inputs used

has_ci	yes
has_tests	yes
has_editorconfig	no
has_linter_config	yes
has_precommit_config	no

Documentation

50Moderate

How it's scored

30/30	README
0/25	Documentation directory
0/15	Documentation / homepage site
10/10	Repository description
10/10	Topics — 5 topics
0/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	dns, external-dns, kubernetes, poweradmin, powerdns
has_wiki	no
homepage	—
docs_site	—
has_readme	yes
has_docs_dir	no
has_description	yes

Security

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

79Good · 16% of overall

Security posture

74Good

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5	Branch-Protection — no data
2.2/2.5	CI-Tests — 28 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5	Code-Review — Found 0/4 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0.8/2.5	Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5	Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5	Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5	License — license file detected
7.5/7.5	Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5	Packaging — packaging workflow detected
4.5/5	Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 9
4/5	SAST — SAST tool detected but not run on all commits
0/5	Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
6/7.5	Signed-Releases — 5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
7.5/7.5	Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	17
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	1
scorecard_aggregate	7.4

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional

How it's scored

35/35	Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25	Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40	No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date

Inputs used

source	osv
advisories	0
affected_packages	0
assessed_packages	67
unassessed_packages	0
affected_by_severity	none
direct_affected_packages	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 67 resolved dependencies against OSV. 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.

72Good · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

40Weak

How it's scored

0/45	Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40	Legible commit history — 37 of 37 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	no
llms_txt_url	—
legible_history_share	1
agent_instruction_files	—
agent_instruction_max_bytes	—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

89Excellent

How it's scored

18/18	One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22	Automated tests
11/11	Lint / format config — .golangci.yaml
11/11	Static type checking — Go (statically typed)
10/10	Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10	Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8	Automated maintenance — 47 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
9/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 9

Inputs used

has_nix	no
has_tests	yes
lockfiles	go.sum
has_dockerfile	yes
typed_language	yes
bootstrap_files	Makefile
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	yes
typecheck_configs	—
agent_commit_share	0
toolchain_manifests	go.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share	0.47

Code legibility for models

89Excellent

How it's scored

45/45	Type-checkable code — Go (statically typed)
44/55	Manageable file sizes — 1/5 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	Go
largest_source_bytes	80,788
source_files_sampled	5
oversized_source_files	1

Key facts

3GitHub stars

1contributors

281commits, last 12 months

6days since last push

33releases

1bus factor

0open issues

Gopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 2 ⇿

0Stars

2Forks

12Releases

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.

Major 0Minor 2Patch 10

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.4 / 10

7.4aggregate

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 · 2026-09-13 00:53 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
n/a	Branch-Protection	internal 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
9	CI-Tests	28 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0	CII-Best-Practices	no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0	Code-Review	Found 0/4 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
3	Contributors	project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10	Dangerous-Workflow	no dangerous workflow patterns detected
10	Dependency-Update-Tool	update tool detected
0	Fuzzing	project is not fuzzed
10	License	license file detected
10	Maintained	30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10	Packaging	packaging workflow detected
9	Pinned-Dependencies	dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 9
8	SAST	SAST tool detected but not run on all commits
0	Security-Policy	security policy file not detected
8	Signed-Releases	5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
10	Token-Permissions	GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10	Vulnerabilities	0 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 5

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
Go	github.com/caarlos0/env/v11	`v11.4.1`	go.mod
Go	github.com/go-chi/chi/v5	`v5.3.2`	go.mod
Go	github.com/prometheus/client_golang	`v1.24.1`	go.mod
Go	github.com/sirupsen/logrus	`v1.10.2`	go.mod
Go	sigs.k8s.io/external-dns	`v0.22.0`	go.mod

All dependencies 67

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 5 direct and 62 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
Go	github.com/caarlos0/env/v11	`v11.4.1`	direct
Go	github.com/go-chi/chi/v5	`v5.3.2`	direct
Go	github.com/prometheus/client_golang	`v1.24.1`	direct
Go	github.com/sirupsen/logrus	`v1.10.2`	direct
Go	sigs.k8s.io/external-dns	`v0.22.0`	direct
Go	github.com/alecthomas/kingpin/v2	`v2.4.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/alecthomas/units	`v0.0.0-20240927000941-0f3dac36c52b`	indirect
Go	github.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/route53	`v1.68.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/aws/smithy-go	`v1.28.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/beorn7/perks	`v1.0.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/cespare/xxhash/v2	`v2.3.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/davecgh/go-spew	`v1.1.2-0.20180830191138-d8f796af33cc`	indirect
Go	github.com/emicklei/go-restful/v3	`v3.13.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/evanphx/json-patch/v5	`v5.9.11`	indirect
Go	github.com/fxamacker/cbor/v2	`v2.9.3`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-logr/logr	`v1.4.4`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-openapi/jsonpointer	`v1.0.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-openapi/jsonreference	`v1.0.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-openapi/swag	`v0.29.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-openapi/swag/cmdutils	`v0.29.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-openapi/swag/conv	`v0.29.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-openapi/swag/fileutils	`v0.29.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-openapi/swag/jsonutils	`v0.29.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-openapi/swag/loading	`v0.29.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-openapi/swag/mangling	`v0.29.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-openapi/swag/netutils	`v0.29.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-openapi/swag/pools	`v0.29.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-openapi/swag/stringutils	`v0.29.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-openapi/swag/typeutils	`v0.29.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-openapi/swag/yamlutils	`v0.29.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/google/gnostic-models	`v0.7.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/google/go-cmp	`v0.7.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/google/uuid	`v1.6.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/json-iterator/go	`v1.1.12`	indirect
Go	github.com/miekg/dns	`v1.1.73`	indirect
Go	github.com/modern-go/concurrent	`v0.0.0-20180306012644-bacd9c7ef1dd`	indirect
Go	github.com/modern-go/reflect2	`v1.0.3-0.20250322232337-35a7c28c31ee`	indirect
Go	github.com/munnerz/goautoneg	`v0.0.0-20191010083416-a7dc8b61c822`	indirect
Go	github.com/onsi/ginkgo/v2	`v2.32.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/onsi/gomega	`v1.43.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/prometheus/client_model	`v0.6.3`	indirect
Go	github.com/prometheus/common	`v0.71.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/prometheus/procfs	`v0.22.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/x448/float16	`v0.8.4`	indirect
Go	github.com/xhit/go-str2duration/v2	`v2.1.0`	indirect
Go	go.yaml.in/yaml/v2	`v2.4.4`	indirect
Go	go.yaml.in/yaml/v3	`v3.0.5`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/net	`v0.58.0`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/oauth2	`v0.36.0`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/sys	`v0.47.0`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/term	`v0.45.0`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/text	`v0.41.0`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/time	`v0.15.0`	indirect
Go	google.golang.org/protobuf	`v1.36.12`	indirect
Go	gopkg.in/evanphx/json-patch.v4	`v4.13.0`	indirect
Go	gopkg.in/inf.v0	`v0.9.1`	indirect
Go	k8s.io/api	`v0.37.0`	indirect
Go	k8s.io/apimachinery	`v0.37.0`	indirect
Go	k8s.io/client-go	`v0.37.0`	indirect
Go	k8s.io/klog/v2	`v2.140.0`	indirect
Go	k8s.io/kube-openapi	`v0.0.0-20260721132016-d427ff9ee9ad`	indirect
Go	k8s.io/utils	`v0.0.0-20260707023825-cf1189d6abe3`	indirect
Go	sigs.k8s.io/controller-runtime	`v0.24.1`	indirect
Go	sigs.k8s.io/json	`v0.0.0-20250730193827-2d320260d730`	indirect
Go	sigs.k8s.io/randfill	`v1.0.0`	indirect
Go	sigs.k8s.io/structured-merge-diff/v6	`v6.4.2`	indirect
Go	sigs.k8s.io/yaml	`v1.6.0`	indirect

Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 67 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

No known advisories affect the assessed dependencies.

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.

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 — Go.

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Key facts

Data collection warnings

More detail

Feedback

Related records