Public record
Software health reportschema 0.17.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-21 05:29 UTC

rsanheim / plur

fast parallel test runner and watcher

Go · RubyMIT★ 1 star⑂ 0 forkssince Feb 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolhow this is determined

rsanheim/plur holds a health index of 69 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (92/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (24/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

69
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.

69
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 62 is calibrated to 69 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Rob SanheimPersonal account
258 followers51 public repossince Jan 2008Doximity

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 publish
Gogithub.com/rsanheim/plurv0.72.2-470 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

92Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
30.5/36Commit cadence44/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume1,332 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year1,332
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year44
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases17 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~8.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count17
latest_release_tagv0.72.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases8.4

Community & Adoption

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

24At Risk · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars1 stars
0/25Forks0 forks
0/15Watchers0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars1
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonbelow_threshold
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code 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_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?

54Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.1/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 99% of commits
4.1/13.5Contributor breadth3 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled3
top_contributor_share0.994
How it's scored
21/42Issue resolution50% of issues closed
23.5/30PR acceptance72/92 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/8 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs72
open_issues1
closed_issues1
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.5
closed_unmerged_prs20
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
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
17.4/25Owner reach258 followers of rsanheim
24.5/25Track record51 public repos, account ~18 yr old
Inputs used
followers258
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginrsanheim
public_repos51
account_age_days6,749
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 go
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history47 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesgithub.com/rsanheim/plur
ecosystemsgo
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

71Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests7 out of 7 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
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics3 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsrails, ruby, rspec
has_wikino
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?

58Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
4.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
2.2/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests7 out of 7 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
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/8 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0.8/2.5Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
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
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated18
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive0
scorecard_aggregate4.8

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages148
unassessed_packages8
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 148 resolved dependencies against OSV. 8 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list. 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.

82Excellent · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes6,840
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap.mise.toml
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingGo (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentdevcontainer, Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
0/8Automated maintenanceno data
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesGemfile.lock, go.sum
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files.mise.toml
has_devcontaineryes
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeGo (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/262 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageGo
largest_source_bytes22,827
source_files_sampled262
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplesexample, examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexample, examples
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

1GitHub stars
3contributors
1,332commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
17releases
1bus factor
1open issues
Go, PyPI, RubyGemspackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Could not fetch pypi package 'plur-docs' from its registry

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.8 / 10
4.8aggregate

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 05:29 UTC

6Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests7 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/8 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 29
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
RubyGemsappraisal2Gemfile
RubyGemsbackspin~> 0.12.0Gemfile
RubyGemsbenchmarkGemfile
RubyGemsguard-rspecGemfile
RubyGemsminitestGemfile
RubyGemsoptimistGemfile
RubyGemsostructGemfile
RubyGemsparallelGemfile
RubyGemsrakeGemfile
RubyGemsrspec~> 3Gemfile
RubyGemsstandardGemfile
RubyGemstimecopGemfile
RubyGemstty-commandGemfile
RubyGemsturbo_testsGemfile
Gogithub.com/alecthomas/kongv1.12.1go.mod
Gogithub.com/bmatcuk/doublestar/v4v4.9.1go.mod
Gogithub.com/BurntSushi/tomlv1.6.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/goccy/go-jsonv0.10.6go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/termv0.45.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/stretchr/testifyv1.10.0go.mod
Gogopkg.in/yaml.v3v3.0.1go.mod
PyPImkdocs>=1.5.3pyproject.toml
PyPImkdocs-material>=9.5.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpymdown-extensions>=10.5pyproject.toml
PyPImkdocs-material-extensions>=1.3pyproject.toml
PyPImkdocs-awesome-pages-plugin>=2.9.2pyproject.toml
PyPImkdocs-git-revision-date-localized-plugin>=1.2.6pyproject.toml
PyPImkdocs-panzoom-plugin@ git+https://github.com/PLAYG0N/mkdocs-panzoom.gitpyproject.toml
PyPIlinkcheckmd>=1.4.0pyproject.toml
All dependencies 156

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 32 direct and 124 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Gogithub.com/alecthomas/kongv1.12.1direct
Gogithub.com/bmatcuk/doublestar/v4v4.9.1direct
Gogithub.com/burntsushi/tomlv1.6.0direct
Gogithub.com/goccy/go-jsonv0.10.6direct
Gogithub.com/stretchr/testifyv1.10.0direct
Gogolang.org/x/termv0.45.0direct
Gogopkg.in/yaml.v3v3.0.1direct
PyPIlinkcheckmddirect
PyPImkdocsdirect
PyPImkdocs-awesome-pages-plugindirect
PyPImkdocs-git-revision-date-localized-plugindirect
PyPImkdocs-materialdirect
PyPImkdocs-material-extensionsdirect
PyPImkdocs-panzoom-plugindirect
PyPIpymdown-extensionsdirect
RubyGemsappraisal23.0.6direct
RubyGemsbackspin0.12.0direct
RubyGemsbenchmark0.5.0direct
RubyGemsguard-rspec4.7.3direct
RubyGemsminitest5.27.0direct
RubyGemsminitest6.0.6direct
RubyGemsoptimist3.2.1direct
RubyGemsostruct0.6.3direct
RubyGemsparallel2.1.0direct
RubyGemsrake13.4.2direct
RubyGemsrspec3.13.0direct
RubyGemsrspec3.13.1direct
RubyGemsrspec3.13.2direct
RubyGemsstandard1.55.0direct
RubyGemstimecop0.9.11direct
RubyGemstty-command0.10.1direct
RubyGemsturbo_tests2.2.5direct
Gogithub.com/davecgh/go-spewv1.1.1indirect
Gogithub.com/pmezard/go-difflibv1.0.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/sysv0.47.0indirect
RubyGemsaction_text-trix2.1.18indirect
RubyGemsactioncable8.1.3indirect
RubyGemsactionmailbox8.1.3indirect
RubyGemsactionmailer8.1.3indirect
RubyGemsactionpack8.1.3indirect
RubyGemsactiontext8.1.3indirect
RubyGemsactionview8.1.3indirect
RubyGemsactivejob8.1.3indirect
RubyGemsactivemodel8.1.3indirect
RubyGemsactiverecord8.1.3indirect
RubyGemsactivestorage8.1.3indirect
RubyGemsactivesupport8.1.3indirect
RubyGemsansi1.5.0indirect
RubyGemsast2.4.3indirect
RubyGemsbase640.3.0indirect
RubyGemsbigdecimal4.1.2indirect
RubyGemsbuilder3.3.0indirect
RubyGemscoderay1.1.3indirect
RubyGemsconcurrent-ruby1.3.7indirect
RubyGemsconnection_pool3.0.2indirect
RubyGemscrass1.0.6indirect
RubyGemsdate3.5.1indirect
RubyGemsdiff-lcs1.6.2indirect
RubyGemsdrb2.2.3indirect
RubyGemserb6.0.4indirect
RubyGemserubi1.13.1indirect
RubyGemsfactory_bot6.6.0indirect
RubyGemsfactory_bot_rails6.5.1indirect
RubyGemsffi1.17.4indirect
RubyGemsformatador1.2.3indirect
RubyGemsglobalid1.3.0indirect
RubyGemsguard2.20.1indirect
RubyGemsguard-compat1.2.1indirect
RubyGemsi18n1.14.8indirect
RubyGemsio-console0.8.2indirect
RubyGemsirb1.18.0indirect
RubyGemsjson2.19.5indirect
RubyGemsjson2.20.0indirect
RubyGemslanguage_server-protocol3.17.0.6indirect
RubyGemslint_roller1.1.0indirect
RubyGemslisten3.10.0indirect
RubyGemslogger1.7.0indirect
RubyGemsloofah2.25.1indirect
RubyGemslumberjack1.4.2indirect
RubyGemsmail2.9.0indirect
RubyGemsmarcel1.1.0indirect
RubyGemsmethod_source1.1.0indirect
RubyGemsmini_mime1.1.5indirect
RubyGemsminitest-reporters1.7.1indirect
RubyGemsnenv0.3.0indirect
RubyGemsnet-imap0.6.4.1indirect
RubyGemsnet-pop0.1.2indirect
RubyGemsnet-protocol0.2.2indirect
RubyGemsnet-smtp0.5.1indirect
RubyGemsnio4r2.7.5indirect
RubyGemsnokogiri1.19.4indirect
RubyGemsnotiffany0.1.3indirect
RubyGemsparallel_tests4.10.1indirect
RubyGemsparser3.3.11.1indirect
RubyGemspastel0.8.0indirect
RubyGemspower_assert2.0.5indirect
RubyGemspp0.6.3indirect
RubyGemsprettyprint0.2.0indirect
RubyGemsprism1.9.0indirect
RubyGemspry0.16.0indirect
RubyGemspsych5.3.1indirect
RubyGemspuma8.0.2indirect
RubyGemsracc1.8.1indirect
RubyGemsrack3.2.6indirect
RubyGemsrack-session2.1.2indirect
RubyGemsrack-test2.2.0indirect
RubyGemsrackup2.3.1indirect
RubyGemsrails8.1.3indirect
RubyGemsrails-dom-testing2.3.0indirect
RubyGemsrails-html-sanitizer1.7.0indirect
RubyGemsrailties8.1.3indirect
RubyGemsrainbow3.1.1indirect
RubyGemsrb-fsevent0.11.2indirect
RubyGemsrb-inotify0.11.1indirect
RubyGemsrdoc7.2.0indirect
RubyGemsregexp_parser2.12.0indirect
RubyGemsreline0.6.3indirect
RubyGemsrspec-core3.13.3indirect
RubyGemsrspec-core3.13.4indirect
RubyGemsrspec-core3.13.5indirect
RubyGemsrspec-core3.13.6indirect
RubyGemsrspec-expectations3.13.4indirect
RubyGemsrspec-expectations3.13.5indirect
RubyGemsrspec-mocks3.13.4indirect
RubyGemsrspec-mocks3.13.5indirect
RubyGemsrspec-mocks3.13.6indirect
RubyGemsrspec-mocks3.13.7indirect
RubyGemsrspec-mocks3.13.8indirect
RubyGemsrspec-rails8.0.4indirect
RubyGemsrspec-support3.13.3indirect
RubyGemsrspec-support3.13.4indirect
RubyGemsrspec-support3.13.6indirect
RubyGemsrspec-support3.13.7indirect
RubyGemsrubocop1.87.0indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-ast1.50.0indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-performance1.26.1indirect
RubyGemsruby-progressbar1.13.0indirect
RubyGemssecurerandom0.4.1indirect
RubyGemsshellany0.0.1indirect
RubyGemssqlite32.9.4indirect
RubyGemsstandard-custom1.0.2indirect
RubyGemsstandard-performance1.9.0indirect
RubyGemsstringio3.2.0indirect
RubyGemstest-unit3.6.8indirect
RubyGemsthor1.5.0indirect
RubyGemstimeout0.6.1indirect
RubyGemstsort0.2.0indirect
RubyGemstty-color0.6.0indirect
RubyGemstzinfo2.0.6indirect
RubyGemsunicode-display_width3.2.0indirect
RubyGemsunicode-emoji4.2.0indirect
RubyGemsuri1.1.1indirect
RubyGemsuseragent0.16.11indirect
RubyGemswebsocket-driver0.8.1indirect
RubyGemswebsocket-extensions0.1.5indirect
RubyGemszeitwerk2.7.5indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 148 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 8 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

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 statisticsGo.