Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-19 19:13 UTC

rmax / scrapy-redis

Redis-based components for Scrapy.

PythonMIT★ 5,643 stars⑂ 1,584 forkssince Aug 2011View on GitHub ↗

rmax/scrapy-redis holds a health index of 71 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (100/100) and lowest on Security (19/100). It was last updated 2 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

71
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.

71
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 63 is calibrated to 71 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

R Max EspinozaPersonal account
677 followers98 public repossince Sep 2008Milence

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
PyPIscrapy-redis0.9.139,03421804 days agoscrapy-redis

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

46Weak · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 2 days ago
2.8/36Commit cadence — 4/52 weeks with commits
7.6/18Commit volume — 6 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — no data
Inputs used
commits_last_year6
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push2
active_weeks_last_year4
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 7 releases published
0/36Release recency — latest release 804 days ago
5.4/27Release cadence — a release every ~443.5 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count7
latest_release_tagv0.9.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release804
mean_days_between_releases443.5

Community & Adoption

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

88Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
60/60Stars — 5,643 stars
25/25Forks — 1,584 forks
13.5/15Watchers — 265 watchers
Inputs used
forks1,584
stars5,643
watchers265
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
7.2/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges8
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateyes
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicescodecov.io, github.com, readthedocs.org, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
61.2/80Monthly downloads — 39,034 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesscrapy-redis
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads39,034
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?

62Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
8/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 64% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 33 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — no data
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled33
top_contributor_share0.644
How it's scored
34.6/42Issue resolution — 82% of issues closed
25.2/30PR acceptance — 95/113 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — no data
Inputs used
merged_prs95
open_issues36
closed_issues168
prs_merged_7d3
prs_decided_7d3
prs_merged_30d4
prs_decided_30d4
issue_closed_ratio0.824
closed_unmerged_prs18
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
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
20.4/25Owner reach — 677 followers of rmax
25/25Track record — 98 public repos, account ~17 yr old
Inputs used
followers677
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginrmax
public_repos98
account_age_days6,569
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
4/35Publish recency — latest publish 804 days ago
20/20Version history — 21 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesscrapy-redis
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish804

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

100Exceptional · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

100Exceptional
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .flake8, setup.cfg ([flake8]), tox.ini
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — http://scrapy-redis.readthedocs.io
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 4 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsscrapy, crawler, distributed, redis
has_wikiyes
homepagehttp://scrapy-redis.readthedocs.io
docs_sitehttp://scrapy-redis.readthedocs.io
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

19Critical · 16% of overall
How it's scored
0/30Security policy (SECURITY.md)
0/25Dependabot config
0/25Dependency lockfiles — published library — lockfiles are an application concern, not expected
0/20CodeQL workflow
Inputs used
sourcefile_signals
lockfiles—
manifestsdocs/requirements.txt, example-project/requirements.txt, requirements-tests.txt, requirements.txt, setup.cfg, setup.py
has_codeql_workflowno
has_security_policyno
has_dependabot_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Dependency lockfiles. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
26.6/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: scrapy 2.19.0 (unknown)
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
37.2/40No advisories left outstanding — 1 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 3,301 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories1
affected_packages1
assessed_packages45
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityunknown 1
direct_affected_packages1
Matched the pypi:scrapy-redis@0.9.1 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 45 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.

62Moderate · 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 — 77 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.77
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile, docs/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .flake8, setup.cfg ([flake8]), tox.ini
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile, docs/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/30 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes22,617
source_files_sampled30
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — example
Inputs used
example_dirsexample
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_of—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

5,643GitHub stars
33contributors
6commits, last 12 months
2days since last push
7releases
1bus factor
36open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • OpenSSF Scorecard timed out after 240s; skipping Scorecard checks

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 1,584 ⇿
0Stars
1,584Forks
7Releases

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.

Only the most recent history is shown — this repository exceeds the collection window, so the earliest history is not captured.

4006008001,0001,2001,4001,6001,584152017-012021-112026-09
Major 0Minor 2Patch 5

Each point covers 9 days.

All dependencies 16

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 16 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIbumpversion—indirect
PyPIcheck-manifest—indirect
PyPIflake8—indirect
PyPImock—indirect
PyPIpip-tools—indirect
PyPIpytest—indirect
PyPIpytest-cov—indirect
PyPIredis—indirect
PyPIscrapy—indirect
PyPIscrapy-redis—indirect
PyPIsix—indirect
PyPIsphinx—indirect
PyPItox—indirect
PyPItwine—indirect
PyPIwatchdog—indirect
PyPIwheel—indirect
Dependency advisories 1

Installing pypi:scrapy-redis@0.9.1 pulls in 45 packages, direct and transitive: 1 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct dependencies.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
scrapy2.19.0directunknown1—

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.