Public record
Software health reportschema 0.17.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-21 03:18 UTC

pypa / abi3audit

Scans Python packages for abi3 violations and inconsistencies

PythonMIT★ 123 stars⑂ 16 forkssince Sep 2022View on GitHub ↗

pypa/abi3audit holds a health index of 89 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (82/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (43/100). It was last updated today. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

89
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.

89
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 75 is calibrated to 89 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

2,374 followers59 public repossince Mar 2011

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPIabi3audit0.0.26333,09725178 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

81Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
20.8/36Commit cadence30/52 weeks with commits
16.5/18Commit volume67 commits in the last year
8/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained9 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
commits_last_year67
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year30
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases26 releases published
27/36Release recencylatest release 178 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~53.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count26
latest_release_tagv0.0.26
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release178
mean_days_between_releases53.3
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?

66Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
33.8/60Stars123 stars
9.8/25Forks16 forks
6/15Watchers13 watchers
Inputs used
forks16
stars123
watchers13
growth_stateorganic
growth_factor_pct100
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
73.6/80Monthly downloads333,097 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesabi3audit
dependents
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads
monthly_downloads333,097
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
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
11.9/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 47% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth10 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 25 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled10
top_contributor_share0.471
How it's scored
33.3/42Issue resolution79% of issues closed
28.7/30PR acceptance173/181 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
4.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 1/3 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
merged_prs173
open_issues7
closed_issues27
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.794
closed_unmerged_prs8
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
24.3/25Owner reach2,374 followers of pypa
24.9/25Track record59 public repos, account ~15 yr old
Inputs used
followers2,374
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginpypa
public_repos59
account_age_days5,619
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 pypi
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 178 days ago
20/20Version history25 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesabi3audit
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish178

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

71Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows5 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://pypi.org/project/abi3audit
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics4 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicscpython-api, cpython-extensions, cpython-internals, python
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://pypi.org/project/abi3audit
docs_sitehttps://pypi.org/project/abi3audit
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

77Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2.2/7.5Code-ReviewFound 1/3 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 25 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
6/7.5Maintained9 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 8
0/5Packagingno data
5/5Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
5/5SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
7.5/7.5Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
2.2/7.5Vulnerabilities7 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate7.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriesno indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages20
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:abi3audit@0.0.26 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 20 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.

43Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
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
agent_instruction_max_bytes
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapMakefile
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
5/8Automated maintenancedependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePython without a type-check config
51.6/55Manageable file sizes1/16 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes89,948
source_files_sampled16
oversized_source_files1

Key facts

123GitHub stars
10contributors
67commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
26releases
2bus factor
7open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

More detail

Star and fork history 123 ★ / 0 ⇿
123Stars

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.

0255075100125123182022-102024-082026-07

Each point covers 4 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.1 / 10
7.1aggregate

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 · 2026-07-21 03:18 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-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3Code-ReviewFound 1/3 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
10Contributorsproject has 25 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
8Maintained9 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 8
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
3Vulnerabilities7 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 8
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIabi3info>= 2024.06.19pyproject.toml
PyPIkaitaistruct~= 0.10pyproject.toml
PyPIpackaging>= 21.3pyproject.toml
PyPIpefile>= 2022.5.30pyproject.toml
PyPIpyelftools>= 0.29pyproject.toml
PyPIrequests>= 2.32.5pyproject.toml
PyPIrequests-cache>= 0.9.6pyproject.toml
PyPIrich>= 12.5.1pyproject.toml
All dependencies 39

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 8 direct and 31 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIabi3info2025.11.29direct
PyPIkaitaistruct0.11direct
PyPIpackaging26.0direct
PyPIpefile2024.8.26direct
PyPIpyelftools0.32direct
PyPIrequests2.32.5direct
PyPIrequests-cache1.2.1direct
PyPIrich14.2.0direct
PyPIattrs25.4.0indirect
PyPIcattrs25.3.0indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.1.4indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.4indirect
PyPIclick8.3.1indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcoverage7.13.1indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.3.1indirect
PyPIidna3.11indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIinterrogate1.7.0indirect
PyPIlibrt0.7.8indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py4.0.0indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImypy1.19.1indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPIpathspec1.0.3indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.5.1indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpretend1.0.9indirect
PyPIpy1.11.0indirect
PyPIpygments2.19.2indirect
PyPIpytest9.0.2indirect
PyPIpytest-cov7.0.0indirect
PyPIruff0.14.14indirect
PyPItabulate0.9.0indirect
PyPItomli2.4.0indirect
PyPItypes-requests2.32.4.20260107indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.15.0indirect
PyPIurl-normalize2.2.1indirect
PyPIurllib32.6.3indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:abi3audit@0.0.26 pulls in 20 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 v0.17.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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