Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-18 20:01 UTC

rubyatscale / codeowners-rs

RustNo license detected★ 9 stars⑂ 8 forkssince Mar 2023View on GitHub ↗

KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

rubyatscale/codeowners-rs holds a health index of 63 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on AI Readiness (84/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (23/100). It was last updated 22 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

overall / 100

Moderate

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

Ownership

Ruby at ScaleOrganization

409 followers25 public repossince Aug 2021

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	Tags
crates.io	codeownerspoints to another repo — not scored	0.1.3	6,583	4	3225 days ago	owners github

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

70Good · 21% of overall

Development activity

57Moderate

How it's scored

28.8/36	Push recency — last push 22 days ago
9/36	Commit cadence — 13/52 weeks with commits
13.3/18	Commit volume — 29 commits in the last year
6/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 8 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 6

Inputs used

commits_last_year	29
human_commit_share	1
days_since_last_push	22
active_weeks_last_year	13

Release discipline

90Excellent

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 61 releases published
36/36	Release recency — latest release 59 days ago
27/27	Release cadence — a release every ~37.3 days
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.

Inputs used

releases_count	61
latest_release_tag	v0.3.4
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	59
mean_days_between_releases	37.3

Community & Adoption

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

23At Risk · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

22At Risk

How it's scored

14.6/60	Stars — 9 stars
7/25	Forks — 8 forks
0/15	Watchers — 2 watchers

Inputs used

forks	8
stars	9
watchers	2
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

25At Risk

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
0/22.5	License — no license file detected
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	no
readme_badges	0
has_contributing	no
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	no
readme_badge_services	—
has_pull_request_template	no

Sustainability & Governance

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

73Good · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

63Moderate

How it's scored

25.2/54	Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
14.4/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 36% of commits
13.5/13.5	Contributor breadth — 10 contributors
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 7 contributing companies or organizations

Inputs used

bus_factor	2
contributors_sampled	10
top_contributor_share	0.358

Issue & PR responsiveness

88Excellent

How it's scored

39.6/42	Issue resolution — 94% of issues closed
26.5/30	PR acceptance — 90/102 decided PRs merged
0/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
10.5/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 22/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7

Inputs used

merged_prs	90
open_issues	1
closed_issues	17
prs_merged_7d	0
prs_decided_7d	0
prs_merged_30d	3
prs_decided_30d	5
issue_closed_ratio	0.944
closed_unmerged_prs	12
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

69Good

How it's scored

30/30	Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20	Verified domain
18.8/25	Owner reach — 409 followers of rubyatscale
20.4/25	Track record — 25 public repos, account ~5 yr old

Inputs used

followers	409
owner_type	Organization
is_verified	no
owner_login	rubyatscale
public_repos	25
account_age_days	1,845

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

65Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

82Excellent

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 3 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
16/16	Linter config — .rustfmt.toml
0/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4	.editorconfig
18/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 27 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9

Inputs used

has_ci	yes
has_tests	yes
has_editorconfig	no
has_linter_config	yes
has_precommit_config	no

Documentation

40Weak

How it's scored

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

Inputs used

topics	—
has_wiki	yes
homepage	—
docs_site	—
has_readme	yes
has_docs_dir	no
has_description	no

Security

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

51Moderate · 16% of overall

Security posture

51Moderate

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5	Branch-Protection — no data
2.2/2.5	CI-Tests — 27 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
5.2/7.5	Code-Review — Found 22/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
2.5/2.5	Contributors — project has 7 contributing companies or organizations
10/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5	Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5	Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
0/2.5	License — license file not detected
4.5/7.5	Maintained — 8 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 6
0/5	Packaging — no data
0/5	Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
1/5	SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 2
0/5	Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5	Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
6.8/7.5	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	5.1

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

Dependency advisories

50Moderate

How it's scored

14/35	Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: regex 0.2.11 (high 7.5)
9.6/25	Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — 3 affected: thread_local 0.3.6 (high), ansi_term 0.9.0 (unknown), difference 1.0.0 (unknown)
26.4/40	No advisories left outstanding — 4 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 2,098 days ago

Inputs used

source	osv
advisories	6
affected_packages	4
assessed_packages	13
unassessed_packages	0
affected_by_severity	high 2, unknown 2
direct_affected_packages	1

Matched the crates:codeowners@0.1.3 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 13 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.

84Excellent · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

85Excellent

How it's scored

45/45	Agent instructions — AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
0/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40	Legible commit history — 87 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	no
llms_txt_url	—
legible_history_share	0.87
agent_instruction_files	AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes	1,220

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

77Good

How it's scored

12.6/18	One-command bootstrap — Cargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22	Automated tests
11/11	Lint / format config — .rustfmt.toml
11/11	Static type checking — Rust (statically typed)
10/10	Reproducible environment — lockfile
10/10	Demonstrated agent practice — 6 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8	Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

has_nix	no
has_tests	yes
lockfiles	Cargo.lock
has_dockerfile	no
typed_language	yes
bootstrap_files	—
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	yes
typecheck_configs	—
agent_commit_share	0.06
toolchain_manifests	Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share	0

Code legibility for models

100Exceptional

How it's scored

45/45	Type-checkable code — Rust (statically typed)
55/55	Manageable file sizes — 0/102 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	Rust
largest_source_bytes	23,932
source_files_sampled	102
oversized_source_files	0

Key facts

9GitHub stars

10contributors

29commits, last 12 months

22days since last push

61releases

2bus factor

1open issues

crates.iopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
crates package 'codeowners' points at a different repository (https://github.com/softprops/codeowners); excluded from ecosystem scoring

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 8 ⇿

0Stars

8Forks

27Releases

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 2Patch 23

Each point covers 2 days.

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 · 2026-09-18 20:01 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
n/a	Branch-Protection	internal 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
9	CI-Tests	27 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0	CII-Best-Practices	no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7	Code-Review	Found 22/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
10	Contributors	project has 7 contributing companies or organizations
10	Dangerous-Workflow	no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0	Dependency-Update-Tool	no update tool detected
0	Fuzzing	project is not fuzzed
0	License	license file not detected
6	Maintained	8 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 6
n/a	Packaging	packaging workflow not detected
0	Pinned-Dependencies	dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
2	SAST	SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 2
0	Security-Policy	security policy file not detected
0	Signed-Releases	Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
9	Token-Permissions	detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10	Vulnerabilities	0 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 21

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
crates.io	clap	`4.5.45`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	clap_derive	`4.5.45`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	crossbeam-channel	`0.5.15`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	error-stack	`0.8.0`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	enum_dispatch	`0.3.13`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	fast-glob	`1.0.0`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	glob	`0.3.3`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	ignore	`0.4.23`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	itertools	`0.14.0`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	lazy_static	`1.5.0`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	memoize	`0.5.1`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	path-clean	`1.0.1`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	rayon	`1.10.0`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	regex	`1.11.1`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	serde	`1.0.219`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	serde_json	`1.0.143`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	serde_yaml	`0.9.34`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	similar	`2.6.0`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	tempfile	`3.21.0`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	tracing	`0.1.41`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	tracing-subscriber	`0.3.19`	Cargo.toml

All dependencies 135

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 21 direct and 114 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
crates.io	clap	`4.5.45`	direct
crates.io	clap_derive	`4.5.45`	direct
crates.io	crossbeam-channel	`0.5.15`	direct
crates.io	enum_dispatch	`0.3.13`	direct
crates.io	error-stack	`0.8.0`	direct
crates.io	fast-glob	`1.0.0`	direct
crates.io	glob	`0.3.3`	direct
crates.io	ignore	`0.4.23`	direct
crates.io	itertools	`0.14.0`	direct
crates.io	lazy_static	`1.5.0`	direct
crates.io	memoize	`0.5.1`	direct
crates.io	path-clean	`1.0.1`	direct
crates.io	rayon	`1.10.0`	direct
crates.io	regex	`1.11.1`	direct
crates.io	serde	`1.0.219`	direct
crates.io	serde_json	`1.0.143`	direct
crates.io	serde_yaml	`0.9.34+deprecated`	direct
crates.io	similar	`2.7.0`	direct
crates.io	tempfile	`3.21.0`	direct
crates.io	tracing	`0.1.41`	direct
crates.io	tracing-subscriber	`0.3.20`	direct
crates.io	aho-corasick	`1.1.3`	indirect
crates.io	anstream	`0.6.18`	indirect
crates.io	anstyle	`1.0.10`	indirect
crates.io	anstyle-parse	`0.2.0`	indirect
crates.io	anstyle-query	`1.0.0`	indirect
crates.io	anstyle-wincon	`3.0.6`	indirect
crates.io	anyhow	`1.0.104`	indirect
crates.io	arrayvec	`0.7.6`	indirect
crates.io	assert_cmd	`2.0.17`	indirect
crates.io	autocfg	`1.1.0`	indirect
crates.io	bitflags	`2.6.0`	indirect
crates.io	bstr	`1.10.0`	indirect
crates.io	cfg-if	`1.0.0`	indirect
crates.io	ci_info	`0.10.2`	indirect
crates.io	clap_builder	`4.5.44`	indirect
crates.io	clap_lex	`0.7.5`	indirect
crates.io	colorchoice	`1.0.0`	indirect
crates.io	crossbeam-deque	`0.8.3`	indirect
crates.io	crossbeam-epoch	`0.9.20`	indirect
crates.io	crossbeam-utils	`0.8.21`	indirect
crates.io	diff	`0.1.13`	indirect
crates.io	difflib	`0.4.0`	indirect
crates.io	doc-comment	`0.3.3`	indirect
crates.io	either	`1.8.1`	indirect
crates.io	envmnt	`0.8.4`	indirect
crates.io	equivalent	`1.0.1`	indirect
crates.io	errno	`0.3.13`	indirect
crates.io	fastrand	`2.1.1`	indirect
crates.io	float-cmp	`0.10.0`	indirect
crates.io	fsio	`0.1.3`	indirect
crates.io	getopts	`0.2.21`	indirect
crates.io	getrandom	`0.3.3`	indirect
crates.io	globset	`0.4.15`	indirect
crates.io	hashbrown	`0.12.3`	indirect
crates.io	hashbrown	`0.15.1`	indirect
crates.io	heck	`0.5.0`	indirect
crates.io	indexmap	`1.9.3`	indirect
crates.io	indexmap	`2.6.0`	indirect
crates.io	indoc	`2.0.6`	indirect
crates.io	is_terminal_polyfill	`1.70.1`	indirect
crates.io	itoa	`1.0.6`	indirect
crates.io	libc	`0.2.175`	indirect
crates.io	linux-raw-sys	`0.9.4`	indirect
crates.io	log	`0.4.22`	indirect
crates.io	matchers	`0.2.0`	indirect
crates.io	memchr	`2.7.4`	indirect
crates.io	memoize-inner	`0.5.1`	indirect
crates.io	nias	`0.5.0`	indirect
crates.io	normalize-line-endings	`0.3.0`	indirect
crates.io	nu-ansi-term	`0.50.3`	indirect
crates.io	num-traits	`0.2.15`	indirect
crates.io	once_cell	`1.20.2`	indirect
crates.io	pin-project-lite	`0.2.9`	indirect
crates.io	predicates	`3.1.3`	indirect
crates.io	predicates-core	`1.0.6`	indirect
crates.io	predicates-tree	`1.0.9`	indirect
crates.io	pretty_assertions	`1.4.1`	indirect
crates.io	proc-macro2	`1.0.89`	indirect
crates.io	quote	`1.0.37`	indirect
crates.io	r-efi	`5.3.0`	indirect
crates.io	rayon-core	`1.12.1`	indirect
crates.io	regex-automata	`0.4.8`	indirect
crates.io	regex-syntax	`0.8.5`	indirect
crates.io	rustc_version	`0.4.1`	indirect
crates.io	rustix	`1.0.8`	indirect
crates.io	rusty-hook	`0.11.2`	indirect
crates.io	ryu	`1.0.13`	indirect
crates.io	same-file	`1.0.6`	indirect
crates.io	semver	`1.0.17`	indirect
crates.io	serde_derive	`1.0.219`	indirect
crates.io	sharded-slab	`0.1.4`	indirect
crates.io	smallvec	`1.10.0`	indirect
crates.io	strsim	`0.11.1`	indirect
crates.io	syn	`1.0.109`	indirect
crates.io	syn	`2.0.87`	indirect
crates.io	termtree	`0.4.1`	indirect
crates.io	thread_local	`1.1.7`	indirect
crates.io	toml	`0.5.11`	indirect
crates.io	tracing-attributes	`0.1.30`	indirect
crates.io	tracing-core	`0.1.34`	indirect
crates.io	tracing-log	`0.2.0`	indirect
crates.io	unicode-ident	`1.0.8`	indirect
crates.io	unicode-width	`0.1.10`	indirect
crates.io	unsafe-libyaml	`0.2.11`	indirect
crates.io	utf8parse	`0.2.1`	indirect
crates.io	valuable	`0.1.0`	indirect
crates.io	wait-timeout	`0.2.0`	indirect
crates.io	walkdir	`2.5.0`	indirect
crates.io	wasi	`0.14.2+wasi-0.2.4`	indirect
crates.io	winapi	`0.3.9`	indirect
crates.io	winapi-i686-pc-windows-gnu	`0.4.0`	indirect
crates.io	winapi-util	`0.1.5`	indirect
crates.io	winapi-x86_64-pc-windows-gnu	`0.4.0`	indirect
crates.io	windows-sys	`0.48.0`	indirect
crates.io	windows-sys	`0.59.0`	indirect
crates.io	windows-targets	`0.48.0`	indirect
crates.io	windows-targets	`0.52.6`	indirect
crates.io	windows_aarch64_gnullvm	`0.48.0`	indirect
crates.io	windows_aarch64_gnullvm	`0.52.6`	indirect
crates.io	windows_aarch64_msvc	`0.48.0`	indirect
crates.io	windows_aarch64_msvc	`0.52.6`	indirect
crates.io	windows_i686_gnu	`0.48.0`	indirect
crates.io	windows_i686_gnu	`0.52.6`	indirect
crates.io	windows_i686_gnullvm	`0.52.6`	indirect
crates.io	windows_i686_msvc	`0.48.0`	indirect
crates.io	windows_i686_msvc	`0.52.6`	indirect
crates.io	windows_x86_64_gnu	`0.48.0`	indirect
crates.io	windows_x86_64_gnu	`0.52.6`	indirect
crates.io	windows_x86_64_gnullvm	`0.48.0`	indirect
crates.io	windows_x86_64_gnullvm	`0.52.6`	indirect
crates.io	windows_x86_64_msvc	`0.48.0`	indirect
crates.io	windows_x86_64_msvc	`0.52.6`	indirect
crates.io	wit-bindgen-rt	`0.39.0`	indirect
crates.io	yansi	`1.0.1`	indirect

Dependency advisories 4

Installing crates:codeowners@0.1.3 pulls in 13 packages, direct and transitive: 4 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct dependencies.

Package	Version	Relation	Severity	Advisories	Fixed in
regex	`0.2.11`	direct	high	2	`1.5.5`
thread_local	`0.3.6`	indirect	high	2	`1.1.4`
ansi_term	`0.9.0`	indirect	unknown	1	—
difference	`1.0.0`	indirect	unknown	1	—

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 — crates.io.

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Key facts

Data collection warnings

More detail

Feedback

Related records