Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-08 07:55 UTC

rstackjs / rspack-lite-tapable

Lite weight tapable for Rspack.

JavaScript · TypeScriptMIT★ 9 stars⑂ 4 forkssince Aug 2024View on GitHub ↗

rstackjs/rspack-lite-tapable holds a health index of 71 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (80/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (50/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

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.

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)

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

RstackOrganization

179 followers115 public repossince Mar 2023

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

Package ecosystems

Registry	Package	Version	Downloads / mo	Versions	Last publish
npm	@rspack/lite-tapable	1.1.5	26,014,855	19	38 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

80Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

78Good

How it's scored

36/36	Push recency — last push 0 days ago
15.9/36	Commit cadence — 23/52 weeks with commits
15.8/18	Commit volume — 56 commits in the last year
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 22 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

commits_last_year	56
human_commit_share	0.545
days_since_last_push	0
active_weeks_last_year	23

Release discipline

84Excellent

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 7 releases published
36/36	Release recency — latest release 38 days ago
12.6/27	Release cadence — a release every ~120.2 days
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data

Inputs used

releases_count	7
latest_release_tag	v1.1.5
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	38
mean_days_between_releases	120.2

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?

50Moderate · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

19Critical

How it's scored

14.6/60	Stars — 9 stars
4/25	Forks — 4 forks
0/15	Watchers — 2 watchers

Inputs used

forks	4
stars	9
watchers	2
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

50Moderate

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
22.5/22.5	License — recognized license (MIT)
0/18	CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5	Code of conduct
0/7.2	Issue template
0/6.3	PR template

Inputs used

has_readme	yes
has_license	yes
readme_badges	3
has_contributing	no
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	no
readme_badge_services	shields.io
has_pull_request_template	no

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

100Exceptional

How it's scored

80/80	Monthly downloads — 26,014,855 downloads/month across npm
0/20	Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem

Inputs used

packages	@rspack/lite-tapable
dependents	—
ecosystems	npm
total_downloads	—
monthly_downloads	26,014,855
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?

53Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

26At Risk

How it's scored

9/54	Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
2.1/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 90% of commits
5.4/13.5	Contributor breadth — 4 contributors
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 8 contributing companies or organizations

Inputs used

bus_factor	1
contributors_sampled	4
top_contributor_share	0.905

Issue & PR responsiveness

33At Risk

How it's scored

0/42	Issue resolution — 0% of issues closed
28.9/30	PR acceptance — 55/57 decided PRs merged
0/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/25 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

merged_prs	55
open_issues	3
closed_issues	0
prs_merged_7d	3
prs_decided_7d	3
prs_merged_30d	5
prs_decided_30d	5
issue_closed_ratio	0
closed_unmerged_prs	2
first_time_authors_30d	0
first_time_prs_merged_30d	0
first_time_prs_decided_30d	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

66Good

How it's scored

30/30	Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20	Verified domain
16.2/25	Owner reach — 179 followers of rstackjs
19.9/25	Track record — 115 public repos, account ~3 yr old

Inputs used

followers	179
owner_type	Organization
is_verified	no
owner_login	rstackjs
public_repos	115
account_age_days	1,260

Package maintenance

100Exceptional

How it's scored

25/25	Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on npm
35/35	Publish recency — latest publish 38 days ago
20/20	Version history — 19 published versions
20/20	Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked

Inputs used

packages	@rspack/lite-tapable
ecosystems	npm
any_deprecated	no
min_days_since_publish	38

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

65Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

68Good

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
0/16	Linter config
0/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4	.editorconfig
20/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 25 out of 25 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

has_ci	yes
has_tests	yes
has_editorconfig	no
has_linter_config	no
has_precommit_config	no

Documentation

60Moderate

How it's scored

30/30	README
0/25	Documentation directory
0/15	Documentation / homepage site
10/10	Repository description
10/10	Topics — 2 topics
10/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	rspack, tapable
has_wiki	yes
homepage	—
docs_site	—
has_readme	yes
has_docs_dir	no
has_description	yes

Security

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

70Good · 16% of overall

Security posture

62Moderate

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5	Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.5/2.5	CI-Tests — 25 out of 25 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5	Code-Review — Found 0/25 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5	Contributors — project has 8 contributing companies or organizations
10/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5	Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5	Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5	License — license file detected
7.5/7.5	Maintained — 22 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5	Packaging — no data
5/5	Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
5/5	SAST — SAST tool is run on all commits
0/5	Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5	Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5	Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	16
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	2
scorecard_aggregate	6.2

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional

How it's scored

35/35	Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25	Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40	No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date

Inputs used

source	osv
advisories	0
affected_packages	0
assessed_packages	121
unassessed_packages	0
affected_by_severity	none
direct_affected_packages	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 121 resolved dependencies against OSV. 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.

57Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

40Weak

How it's scored

0/45	Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40	Legible commit history — 42 of 42 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	no
llms_txt_url	—
legible_history_share	1
agent_instruction_files	—
agent_instruction_max_bytes	—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

61Moderate

How it's scored

0/18	One-command bootstrap
22/22	Automated tests
0/11	Lint / format config
11/11	Static type checking — tsconfig.json
10/10	Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10	Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 77
8/8	Automated maintenance — 31 of the last 77 commits are automated dependency updates
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned

Inputs used

has_nix	no
has_tests	yes
lockfiles	pnpm-lock.yaml
has_dockerfile	no
typed_language	no
bootstrap_files	—
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	no
typecheck_configs	tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share	0
toolchain_manifests	—
dependency_bot_commit_share	0.403

Code legibility for models

82Excellent

How it's scored

27/45	Type-checkable code — JavaScript with type-check config (tsconfig.json)
55/55	Manageable file sizes — 0/12 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	JavaScript
largest_source_bytes	34,217
source_files_sampled	12
oversized_source_files	0

Key facts

9GitHub stars

4contributors

56commits, last 12 months

0days since last push

7releases

1bus factor

3open issues

npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 4 ⇿

0Stars

4Forks

1Releases

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.

Major 0Minor 1Patch 0

Each point covers 2 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.2 / 10

6.2aggregate

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 · 2026-09-08 07:55 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
0	Branch-Protection	branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10	CI-Tests	25 out of 25 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0	CII-Best-Practices	no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0	Code-Review	Found 0/25 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10	Contributors	project has 8 contributing companies or organizations
10	Dangerous-Workflow	no dangerous workflow patterns detected
10	Dependency-Update-Tool	update tool detected
0	Fuzzing	project is not fuzzed
10	License	license file detected
10	Maintained	22 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/a	Packaging	packaging workflow not detected
10	Pinned-Dependencies	all dependencies are pinned
10	SAST	SAST tool is run on all commits
0	Security-Policy	security policy file not detected
n/a	Signed-Releases	no releases found
0	Token-Permissions	detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10	Vulnerabilities	0 existing vulnerabilities detected

All dependencies 121

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 121 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
npm	@ast-grep/napi	`0.45.1`	indirect
npm	@ast-grep/napi-darwin-arm64	`0.45.1`	indirect
npm	@ast-grep/napi-darwin-x64	`0.45.1`	indirect
npm	@ast-grep/napi-linux-arm64-gnu	`0.45.1`	indirect
npm	@ast-grep/napi-linux-arm64-musl	`0.45.1`	indirect
npm	@ast-grep/napi-linux-x64-gnu	`0.45.1`	indirect
npm	@ast-grep/napi-linux-x64-musl	`0.45.1`	indirect
npm	@ast-grep/napi-win32-arm64-msvc	`0.45.1`	indirect
npm	@ast-grep/napi-win32-ia32-msvc	`0.45.1`	indirect
npm	@ast-grep/napi-win32-x64-msvc	`0.45.1`	indirect
npm	@emnapi/core	`1.11.3`	indirect
npm	@emnapi/runtime	`1.11.3`	indirect
npm	@emnapi/wasi-threads	`1.2.3`	indirect
npm	@napi-rs/wasm-runtime	`1.1.6`	indirect
npm	@rsbuild/core	`2.2.1`	indirect
npm	@rsbuild/core	`2.2.2`	indirect
npm	@rslib/core	`1.0.0-rc.2`	indirect
npm	@rslint/core	`0.9.0`	indirect
npm	@rslint/native-darwin-arm64	`0.9.0`	indirect
npm	@rslint/native-darwin-x64	`0.9.0`	indirect
npm	@rslint/native-linux-arm64-gnu	`0.9.0`	indirect
npm	@rslint/native-linux-arm64-musl	`0.9.0`	indirect
npm	@rslint/native-linux-x64-gnu	`0.9.0`	indirect
npm	@rslint/native-linux-x64-musl	`0.9.0`	indirect
npm	@rslint/native-win32-arm64-msvc	`0.9.0`	indirect
npm	@rslint/native-win32-x64-msvc	`0.9.0`	indirect
npm	@rspack/binding	`2.2.1`	indirect
npm	@rspack/binding	`2.2.2`	indirect
npm	@rspack/binding-darwin-arm64	`2.2.1`	indirect
npm	@rspack/binding-darwin-arm64	`2.2.2`	indirect
npm	@rspack/binding-darwin-x64	`2.2.1`	indirect
npm	@rspack/binding-darwin-x64	`2.2.2`	indirect
npm	@rspack/binding-linux-arm64-gnu	`2.2.1`	indirect
npm	@rspack/binding-linux-arm64-gnu	`2.2.2`	indirect
npm	@rspack/binding-linux-arm64-musl	`2.2.1`	indirect
npm	@rspack/binding-linux-arm64-musl	`2.2.2`	indirect
npm	@rspack/binding-linux-ppc64-gnu	`2.2.1`	indirect
npm	@rspack/binding-linux-ppc64-gnu	`2.2.2`	indirect
npm	@rspack/binding-linux-riscv64-gnu	`2.2.1`	indirect
npm	@rspack/binding-linux-riscv64-gnu	`2.2.2`	indirect
npm	@rspack/binding-linux-riscv64-musl	`2.2.1`	indirect
npm	@rspack/binding-linux-riscv64-musl	`2.2.2`	indirect
npm	@rspack/binding-linux-s390x-gnu	`2.2.1`	indirect
npm	@rspack/binding-linux-s390x-gnu	`2.2.2`	indirect
npm	@rspack/binding-linux-x64-gnu	`2.2.1`	indirect
npm	@rspack/binding-linux-x64-gnu	`2.2.2`	indirect
npm	@rspack/binding-linux-x64-musl	`2.2.1`	indirect
npm	@rspack/binding-linux-x64-musl	`2.2.2`	indirect
npm	@rspack/binding-wasm32-wasi	`2.2.1`	indirect
npm	@rspack/binding-wasm32-wasi	`2.2.2`	indirect
npm	@rspack/binding-win32-arm64-msvc	`2.2.1`	indirect
npm	@rspack/binding-win32-arm64-msvc	`2.2.2`	indirect
npm	@rspack/binding-win32-ia32-msvc	`2.2.1`	indirect
npm	@rspack/binding-win32-ia32-msvc	`2.2.2`	indirect
npm	@rspack/binding-win32-x64-msvc	`2.2.1`	indirect
npm	@rspack/binding-win32-x64-msvc	`2.2.2`	indirect
npm	@rspack/core	`2.2.1`	indirect
npm	@rspack/core	`2.2.2`	indirect
npm	@rstackjs/cli-darwin-arm64	`0.7.2`	indirect
npm	@rstackjs/cli-darwin-x64	`0.7.2`	indirect
npm	@rstackjs/cli-linux-arm64-gnu	`0.7.2`	indirect
npm	@rstackjs/cli-linux-arm64-musl	`0.7.2`	indirect
npm	@rstackjs/cli-linux-ppc64-gnu	`0.7.2`	indirect
npm	@rstackjs/cli-linux-riscv64-gnu	`0.7.2`	indirect
npm	@rstackjs/cli-linux-riscv64-musl	`0.7.2`	indirect
npm	@rstackjs/cli-linux-s390x-gnu	`0.7.2`	indirect
npm	@rstackjs/cli-linux-x64-gnu	`0.7.2`	indirect
npm	@rstackjs/cli-linux-x64-musl	`0.7.2`	indirect
npm	@rstackjs/cli-win32-arm64-msvc	`0.7.2`	indirect
npm	@rstackjs/cli-win32-ia32-msvc	`0.7.2`	indirect
npm	@rstackjs/cli-win32-x64-msvc	`0.7.2`	indirect
npm	@rstest/core	`0.11.11`	indirect
npm	@swc/helpers	`0.5.23`	indirect
npm	@tybys/wasm-util	`0.10.3`	indirect
npm	@types/chai	`5.2.3`	indirect
npm	@types/deep-eql	`4.0.2`	indirect
npm	@types/node	`24.13.3`	indirect
npm	@typescript/typescript-aix-ppc64	`7.0.2`	indirect
npm	@typescript/typescript-darwin-arm64	`7.0.2`	indirect
npm	@typescript/typescript-darwin-x64	`7.0.2`	indirect
npm	@typescript/typescript-freebsd-arm64	`7.0.2`	indirect
npm	@typescript/typescript-freebsd-x64	`7.0.2`	indirect
npm	@typescript/typescript-linux-arm	`7.0.2`	indirect
npm	@typescript/typescript-linux-arm64	`7.0.2`	indirect
npm	@typescript/typescript-linux-loong64	`7.0.2`	indirect
npm	@typescript/typescript-linux-mips64el	`7.0.2`	indirect
npm	@typescript/typescript-linux-ppc64	`7.0.2`	indirect
npm	@typescript/typescript-linux-riscv64	`7.0.2`	indirect
npm	@typescript/typescript-linux-s390x	`7.0.2`	indirect
npm	@typescript/typescript-linux-x64	`7.0.2`	indirect
npm	@typescript/typescript-netbsd-arm64	`7.0.2`	indirect
npm	@typescript/typescript-netbsd-x64	`7.0.2`	indirect
npm	@typescript/typescript-openbsd-arm64	`7.0.2`	indirect
npm	@typescript/typescript-openbsd-x64	`7.0.2`	indirect
npm	@typescript/typescript-sunos-x64	`7.0.2`	indirect
npm	@typescript/typescript-win32-arm64	`7.0.2`	indirect
npm	@typescript/typescript-win32-x64	`7.0.2`	indirect
npm	@yuku-parser/binding-android-arm64	`0.9.3`	indirect
npm	@yuku-parser/binding-darwin-arm64	`0.9.3`	indirect
npm	@yuku-parser/binding-darwin-x64	`0.9.3`	indirect
npm	@yuku-parser/binding-freebsd-x64	`0.9.3`	indirect
npm	@yuku-parser/binding-linux-arm-gnu	`0.9.3`	indirect
npm	@yuku-parser/binding-linux-arm-musl	`0.9.3`	indirect
npm	@yuku-parser/binding-linux-arm64-gnu	`0.9.3`	indirect
npm	@yuku-parser/binding-linux-arm64-musl	`0.9.3`	indirect
npm	@yuku-parser/binding-linux-x64-gnu	`0.9.3`	indirect
npm	@yuku-parser/binding-linux-x64-musl	`0.9.3`	indirect
npm	@yuku-parser/binding-win32-arm64	`0.9.3`	indirect
npm	@yuku-parser/binding-win32-x64	`0.9.3`	indirect
npm	@yuku-toolchain/types	`0.9.3`	indirect
npm	assertion-error	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	picomatch	`4.0.5`	indirect
npm	prettier	`3.9.6`	indirect
npm	rsbuild-plugin-dts	`1.0.0-rc.2`	indirect
npm	rstack	`0.7.2`	indirect
npm	tinypool	`2.1.2`	indirect
npm	tslib	`2.8.1`	indirect
npm	typescript	`7.0.2`	indirect
npm	undici-types	`7.18.2`	indirect
npm	yuku-ast	`0.9.3`	indirect
npm	yuku-parser	`0.9.3`	indirect

Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 121 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

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.

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 — npm.

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Key facts

Data collection warnings

More detail

Feedback

Related records