Public record
Software health reportschema 0.16.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-21 01:13 UTC

raimon49 / pip-licenses

Dump the license list of packages installed with pip.

PythonMIT★ 372 stars⑂ 58 forkssince Feb 2018View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryhow this is determined
#pip#pypi-packages#administrator#markdown#license-checking

raimon49/pip-licenses holds a health index of 75 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (78/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (51/100). It was last updated 3 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

75
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.

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

Ownership

raimonPersonal account
36 followers111 public repossince Mar 2010

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIpip-licenses5.5.5-73114 days agopippypipackagelicensecheckaudit

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

78Good · 21% of overall

Development activity

75Good
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 3 days ago
13.2/36Commit cadence — 19/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 185 commits in the last year
8/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 10 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
commits_last_year185
human_commit_share—
days_since_last_push3
active_weeks_last_year19

Release discipline

82Excellent
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 67 releases published
27/36Release recency — latest release 114 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~81.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count67
latest_release_tagv-5.5.5
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release114
mean_days_between_releases81.1
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?

65Good · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

61Moderate
How it's scored
41.7/60Stars — 372 stars
14.6/25Forks — 58 forks
4.3/15Watchers — 7 watchers
Inputs used
forks58
stars372
watchers7
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

70Good
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges—
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

62Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

41Weak
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
8.8/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 61% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 35 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 14 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled35
top_contributor_share0.607

Issue & PR responsiveness

62Moderate
How it's scored
31/42Issue resolution — 74% of issues closed
23.3/30PR acceptance — 174/224 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/6 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs174
open_issues31
closed_issues87
prs_merged_7d—
prs_decided_7d—
prs_merged_30d—
prs_decided_30d—
issue_closed_ratio0.737
closed_unmerged_prs50
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.

Ownership & stewardship

58Moderate
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
11.3/25Owner reach — 36 followers of raimon49
25/25Track record — 111 public repos, account ~16 yr old
Inputs used
followers36
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginraimon49
public_repos111
account_age_days5,973
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 114 days ago
20/20Version history — 73 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagespip-licenses
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish114

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

61Moderate · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

62Moderate
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
14/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 5 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

60Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 5 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicspip, pypi-packages, administrator, markdown, license-checking
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

61Moderate · 16% of overall

Security posture

51Moderate
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
1.8/2.5CI-Tests — 5 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/6 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 14 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
6/7.5Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 10 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 8
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
1/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0.8/7.5Vulnerabilities — 9 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate5.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): 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
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_packages2
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:pip-licenses@5.5.5 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 2 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.

51Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

1Critical
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — no 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.

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

76Good
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no data
5/8Automated maintenance — dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
2/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configspy.typed
agent_commit_share—
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice. Remaining weights renormalized.

Code legibility for models

82Excellent
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (py.typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/2 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes52,535
source_files_sampled2
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

372GitHub stars
35contributors
185commits, last 12 months
3days since last push
67releases
1bus factor
31open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.1 / 10
5.1aggregate

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 01:12 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
7CI-Tests5 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/6 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 14 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
8Maintained0 commit(s) and 10 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 8
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
2Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
1Vulnerabilities9 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 2
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIprettytable>= 3.12.0pyproject.toml
PyPItomli>= 2pyproject.toml
All dependencies 55

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 4 direct and 51 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIprettytable—direct
PyPIprettytable3.16.0direct
PyPItomli—direct
PyPItomli2.4.0direct
PyPIbackports-tarfile1.2.0indirect
PyPIbuild1.4.0indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.2.25indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.5indirect
PyPIclick8.1.8indirect
PyPIcoverage7.10.7indirect
PyPIdistlib0.4.0indirect
PyPIdocutils0.22.4indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.3.1indirect
PyPIfilelock—indirect
PyPIid1.6.1indirect
PyPIidna3.11indirect
PyPIimportlib-metadata8.7.1indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.1.0indirect
PyPIjaraco-classes3.4.0indirect
PyPIjaraco-context6.1.1indirect
PyPIjaraco-functools4.4.0indirect
PyPIkeyring25.7.0indirect
PyPIlibrt0.8.1indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py3.0.0indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImore-itertools10.8.0indirect
PyPImypy1.19.1indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPInh30.3.3indirect
PyPIpackaging26.0indirect
PyPIpathspec1.0.4indirect
PyPIpip-tools7.5.3indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.4.0indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpygments2.19.2indirect
PyPIpypandoc1.16.2indirect
PyPIpyproject-hooks1.2.0indirect
PyPIpytest8.4.2indirect
PyPIpytest-cov7.0.0indirect
PyPIpytest-runner6.0.1indirect
PyPIpython-discovery1.1.3indirect
PyPIreadme-renderer44.0indirect
PyPIrequests2.32.5indirect
PyPIrequests-toolbelt1.0.0indirect
PyPIrfc39862.0.0indirect
PyPIrich14.3.3indirect
PyPIruff0.15.5indirect
PyPItomli-w1.2.0indirect
PyPItwine6.2.0indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.15.0indirect
PyPIurllib32.6.3indirect
PyPIvirtualenv21.2.0indirect
PyPIwcwidth0.6.0indirect
PyPIwheel0.46.3indirect
PyPIzipp3.23.0indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:pip-licenses@5.5.5 pulls in 2 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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with raimon49/pip-licenses. Read them side by side →

98pypa/pipxInstall and Run Python Applications in Isolated EnvironmentsExceptional92pypa/readme_rendererSafely render long_description/README files in WarehouseExcellent92pypa/setuptoolsOfficial project repository for the Setuptools build systemExcellent86aboutcode-org/scancode-toolkit:mag: ScanCode detects licenses, copyrights, dependencies by "scanning code" ... to discover and inventory open source and third-party packages used in your code. Sponsored by NLnet, the Google Summer of Code, Azure credits, nexB and other generous sponsors!Excellent86EmbarkStudios/cargo-about📜 Cargo plugin to generate list of all licenses for a crate 🦀Excellent99pypa/cibuildwheel🎡 Build Python wheels for all the platforms with minimal configuration. Exceptional

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 v0.16.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics — PyPI.