Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-14 04:39 UTC

powsybl / pypowsybl

A PowSyBl and Python integration based on GraalVM native image

Java · PythonMPL-2.0★ 102 stars⑂ 27 forkssince Nov 2020View on GitHub ↗

powsybl/pypowsybl holds a health index of 93 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Vitality (86/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (67/100). It was last updated 2 days ago. 3 contributors account for most of its recent work.

93
overall / 100
Exceptional

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.

93
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 79 is calibrated to 93 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

PowSyBlOrganization
175 followers52 public repossince Jul 2017

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPIpypowsybl1.16.123,9863053 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

86Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 2 days ago
24.2/36Commit cadence — 35/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 151 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 5 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year151
human_commit_share0.99
days_since_last_push2
active_weeks_last_year35
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 53 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 53 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~58.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count53
latest_release_tagv1.16.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release53
mean_days_between_releases58.4

Community & Adoption

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

71Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
32.5/60Stars — 102 stars
11.8/25Forks — 27 forks
7.1/15Watchers — 20 watchers
Inputs used
forks27
stars102
watchers20
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MPL-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges8
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, readthedocs.org, shields.io, sonarcloud.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
58.4/80Monthly downloads — 23,986 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagespypowsybl
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads23,986
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
36/54Bus factor — 3 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
16.8/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 25% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 47 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 9 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor3
contributors_sampled47
top_contributor_share0.252
How it's scored
31.3/42Issue resolution — 74% of issues closed
27.4/30PR acceptance — 878/962 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_prs878
open_issues77
closed_issues225
prs_merged_7d2
prs_decided_7d2
prs_merged_30d4
prs_decided_30d4
issue_closed_ratio0.745
closed_unmerged_prs84
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
16.1/25Owner reach — 175 followers of powsybl
24.6/25Track record — 52 public repos, account ~9 yr old
Inputs used
followers175
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginpowsybl
public_repos52
account_age_days3,357

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 53 days ago
20/20Version history — 30 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagespypowsybl
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish53

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

84Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 5 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .pylintrc
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 29 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

85Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 9 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsloadflow, powerflow, power-flow, load-flow, power-system, power-system-analysis, power-system-simulation, cgmes, python
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

72Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 29 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
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 9 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no 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 — 30 commit(s) and 5 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
3/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6
5/5SAST — SAST tool is run on all commits
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 10 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate6.5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages7
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the pypi:pypowsybl@1.16.1 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 7 packages. 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.

67Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 88 of 99 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.889
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — docs/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .pylintrc
11/11Static type checking — mypy.ini, pypowsybl/py.typed
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 1 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesdocs/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsmypy.ini, pypowsybl/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsjava/pom.xml, java/pypowsybl/pom.xml
dependency_bot_commit_share0.01
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Java (statically typed)
54.2/55Manageable file sizes — 8/547 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJava
largest_source_bytes342,804
source_files_sampled547
oversized_source_files8

Key facts

102GitHub stars
47contributors
151commits, last 12 months
2days since last push
53releases
3bus factor
77open issues
Maven, PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 27 ⇿
0Stars
27Forks
46Releases

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.

0510152025302722021-042023-122026-09
Major 1Minor 33Patch 11

Each point covers 5 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.5 / 10
6.5aggregate

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 · 2026-09-14 04:38 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
10CI-Tests29 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
10Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
10Contributorsproject has 9 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 5 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
6Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities10 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 4
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-dependencies${powsybl-dependencies.version}java/pom.xml
PyPIprettytable>=2.0.0setup.cfg
PyPIpandas>=2.2.3setup.cfg
PyPInetworkx—setup.cfg
All dependencies 89

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 4 direct and 85 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-dependencies2026.1.0direct
PyPInetworkx—direct
PyPIpandas—direct
PyPIprettytable—direct
Mavench.qos.logback:logback-classic—indirect
Mavench.qos.logback:logback-core—indirect
Mavencom.github.luben:zstd-jni—indirect
Mavencom.google.re2j:re2j—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:open-rao-crac-api—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:open-rao-crac-impl—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:open-rao-crac-io-cim—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:open-rao-crac-io-cse—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:open-rao-crac-io-fb-constraint—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:open-rao-crac-io-json—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:open-rao-crac-io-nc—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:open-rao-monitoring—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:open-rao-rao-api—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:open-rao-rao-result-json—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:open-rao-search-tree-rao—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-ampl-converter—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-cgmes-conformity—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-cgmes-conversion—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-cgmes-extensions—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-cgmes-gl—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-cgmes-model—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-commons-test—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-config-classic—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-dynaflow—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-dynawo-extensions-api—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-dynawo-extensions-impl—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-dynawo-extensions-serde—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-dynawo-simulation—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-entsoe-commons—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-flow-decomposition—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-glsk-document-ucte—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-ieee-cdf-converter—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-iidm-api—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-iidm-geodata—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-iidm-impl—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-iidm-modification—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-iidm-reducer—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-iidm-serde—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-iidm-test—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-loadflow-api—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-loadflow-results-completion—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-math-native—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-matpower-converter—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-network-area-diagram—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-open-loadflow—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-open-reac—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-powerfactory-converter—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-powerfactory-dgs—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-psse-converter—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-shortcircuit-api—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-single-line-diagram-cgmes-layout—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-single-line-diagram-core—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-tools—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-triple-store-impl-rdf4j—indirect
Mavencom.powsybl:powsybl-ucte-converter—indirect
Mavenorg.apache.commons:commons-collections44.4indirect
Mavenorg.apache.commons:commons-csv—indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-dependency-plugin3.6.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-shade-plugin—indirect
Mavenorg.assertj:assertj-core—indirect
Mavenorg.awaitility:awaitility—indirect
Mavenorg.codehaus.janino:janino3.1.0indirect
Mavenorg.graalvm.nativeimage:svm25.0.4indirect
Mavenorg.graalvm.sdk:nativeimage25.0.4indirect
Mavenorg.mapdb:mapdb3.0.8indirect
Mavenorg.slf4j:log4j-over-slf4j—indirect
PyPIcmake—indirect
PyPIcoverage7.3.2indirect
PyPIfuro2025.12.19indirect
PyPIllvmlite—indirect
PyPImatplotlib—indirect
PyPImypy1.15.0indirect
PyPIpandapower—indirect
PyPIpandas-stubs2.2.2.240603indirect
PyPIpybind11—indirect
PyPIpylint3.2.0indirect
PyPIpyoptinterface0.6.1indirect
PyPIpytest—indirect
PyPIpytest-asyncio0.24.0indirect
PyPIsetuptools—indirect
PyPIsphinx9.0.4indirect
PyPItabulate0.9.0indirect
PyPItccbox—indirect
PyPItypes-tabulate—indirect
PyPIwheel—indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:pypowsybl@1.16.1 pulls in 7 packages, direct and transitive: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct dependencies.

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.

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 — PyPI.