Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-04 23:22 UTC

rust-lang / rustlings

:crab: Small exercises to get you used to reading and writing Rust code!

RustMIT★ 63,758 stars⑂ 11,237 forkssince Sep 2015View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolTerminal interfacehow this is determined

rust-lang/rustlings holds a health index of 88 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (82/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (53/100). It was last updated 2 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

88
overall / 100
Excellent

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.

88
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 74 is calibrated to 88 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

17,933 followers246 public repossince Sep 2013

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
crates.iorustlings6.5.07,47519348 days agoexerciselearning
crates.iorustlings-macros6.5.07,40518348 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

79Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 2 days ago
20.8/36Commit cadence30/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume135 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year135
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push2
active_weeks_last_year30
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases46 releases published
16.2/36Release recencylatest release 348 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~91.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count46
latest_release_tagv6.5.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release348
mean_days_between_releases91.9
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?

82Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
60/60Stars63,758 stars
25/25Forks11,237 forks
14.2/15Watchers361 watchers
Inputs used
forks11,237
stars63,758
watchers361
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized 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_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
55.6/80Monthly downloads14,880 downloads/month across crates
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesrustlings, rustlings-macros
dependents
ecosystemscrates
total_downloads423,937
monthly_downloads14,880
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?

78Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
12.1/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 46% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth98 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 32 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled98
top_contributor_share0.462
How it's scored
40.6/42Issue resolution97% of issues closed
17.8/30PR acceptance947/1,597 decided PRs merged
4.3/13Newcomer PR acceptance2/6 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
4.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 7/18 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
merged_prs947
open_issues26
closed_issues743
prs_merged_7d3
prs_decided_7d4
prs_merged_30d4
prs_decided_30d8
issue_closed_ratio0.966
closed_unmerged_prs650
first_time_authors_30d4
first_time_prs_merged_30d2
first_time_prs_decided_30d6
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
25/25Owner reach17,933 followers of rust-lang
25/25Track record246 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers17,933
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginrust-lang
public_repos246
account_age_days4,711
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable2 package(s) on crates
26/35Publish recencylatest publish 348 days ago
20/20Version history19 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesrustlings, rustlings-macros
ecosystemscrates
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish348

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

66Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
18/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests10 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://rustlings.rust-lang.org
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics4 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsrust, rustlings, beginner-friendly, exercises
has_wikino
homepagehttps://rustlings.rust-lang.org
docs_sitehttps://rustlings.rust-lang.org
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

67Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.2/2.5CI-Tests10 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2.2/7.5Code-ReviewFound 7/18 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 32 contributing companies or organizations
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 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
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
5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate5.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

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_packages89
unassessed_packages2
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 89 resolved dependencies against OSV. 2 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.

53Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
17.6/40Legible commit history33 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.33
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapwebsite/justfile
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingRust (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesCargo.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_fileswebsite/justfile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml, dev/Cargo.toml, rustlings-macros/Cargo.toml, tests/test_exercises/dev/Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeRust (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/220 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes23,566
source_files_sampled220
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

63,758GitHub stars
98contributors
135commits, last 12 months
2days since last push
46releases
2bus factor
26open issues
crates.io, npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Could not fetch crates package 'exercises' from its registry

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 11,237 ⇿
0Stars
11,237Forks
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.

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

10,00010,25010,50010,75011,00011,25011,237122025-062026-012026-08
Major 0Minor 1Patch 0

Each point covers 2 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.9 / 10
5.9aggregate

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 · 2026-08-04 23:21 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
9CI-Tests10 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3Code-ReviewFound 7/18 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
10Contributorsproject has 32 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
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
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 13
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.ioanyhow1Cargo.toml
crates.ioclap4Cargo.toml
crates.iocrossterm0.29Cargo.toml
crates.ionotify8Cargo.toml
crates.iorustlings-macros=6.5.0Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde_json1Cargo.toml
crates.ioserdeCargo.toml
crates.ioshlex1Cargo.toml
crates.iotomlCargo.toml
crates.ioquote1rustlings-macros/Cargo.toml
crates.ioserderustlings-macros/Cargo.toml
crates.iotomlrustlings-macros/Cargo.toml
npm@tailwindcss/cli^4website/package.json
All dependencies 91

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 11 direct and 80 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
crates.ioanyhow1.0.104direct
crates.ioclap4.6.5direct
crates.iocrossterm0.29.0direct
crates.ionotify8.2.0direct
crates.ioquotedirect
crates.ioquote1.0.47direct
crates.ioserde1.0.229direct
crates.ioserde_json1.0.151direct
crates.ioshlex1.3.0direct
crates.iotoml1.1.4+spec-1.1.0direct
npm@tailwindcss/cli^4direct
crates.ioanstream1.0.0indirect
crates.ioanstyle1.0.14indirect
crates.ioanstyle-parse1.0.0indirect
crates.ioanstyle-query1.1.5indirect
crates.ioanstyle-wincon3.0.11indirect
crates.iobitflags2.13.1indirect
crates.iocfg-if1.0.4indirect
crates.ioclap_builder4.6.5indirect
crates.ioclap_derive4.6.4indirect
crates.ioclap_lex1.1.0indirect
crates.iocolorchoice1.0.5indirect
crates.iocrossterm_winapi0.9.1indirect
crates.iodocument-features0.2.12indirect
crates.ioequivalent1.0.2indirect
crates.ioerrno0.3.14indirect
crates.iofastrand2.5.0indirect
crates.iofsevent-sys4.1.0indirect
crates.iogetrandom0.4.3indirect
crates.iohashbrown0.17.1indirect
crates.ioheck0.5.0indirect
crates.ioindexmap2.14.0indirect
crates.ioinotify0.11.4indirect
crates.ioinotify-sys0.1.8indirect
crates.iois_terminal_polyfill1.70.2indirect
crates.ioitoa1.0.18indirect
crates.iokqueue1.2.0indirect
crates.iokqueue-sys1.1.2indirect
crates.iolibc0.2.189indirect
crates.iolinux-raw-sys0.12.1indirect
crates.iolitrs1.0.0indirect
crates.iolock_api0.4.14indirect
crates.iolog0.4.33indirect
crates.iomemchr2.8.3indirect
crates.iomio1.2.2indirect
crates.ionotify-types2.1.0indirect
crates.ioonce_cell1.21.4indirect
crates.ioonce_cell_polyfill1.70.2indirect
crates.ioparking_lot0.12.5indirect
crates.ioparking_lot_core0.9.12indirect
crates.ioproc-macro21.0.107indirect
crates.ior-efi6.0.0indirect
crates.ioredox_syscall0.5.18indirect
crates.iorustix1.1.4indirect
crates.iosame-file1.0.6indirect
crates.ioscopeguard1.2.0indirect
crates.ioserde_core1.0.229indirect
crates.ioserde_derive1.0.229indirect
crates.ioserde_spanned1.1.1indirect
crates.iosignal-hook0.3.18indirect
crates.iosignal-hook-mio0.2.5indirect
crates.iosignal-hook-registry1.4.8indirect
crates.iosmallvec1.15.2indirect
crates.iostrsim0.11.1indirect
crates.iosyn3.0.3indirect
crates.iotempfile3.27.0indirect
crates.iotoml_datetime1.1.1+spec-1.1.0indirect
crates.iotoml_parser1.1.3+spec-1.1.0indirect
crates.iotoml_writer1.1.2+spec-1.1.0indirect
crates.iounicode-ident1.0.24indirect
crates.ioutf8parse0.2.2indirect
crates.iowalkdir2.5.0indirect
crates.iowasi0.11.1+wasi-snapshot-preview1indirect
crates.iowinapi0.3.9indirect
crates.iowinapi-i686-pc-windows-gnu0.4.0indirect
crates.iowinapi-util0.1.11indirect
crates.iowinapi-x86_64-pc-windows-gnu0.4.0indirect
crates.iowindows-link0.2.1indirect
crates.iowindows-sys0.60.2indirect
crates.iowindows-sys0.61.2indirect
crates.iowindows-targets0.53.5indirect
crates.iowindows_aarch64_gnullvm0.53.1indirect
crates.iowindows_aarch64_msvc0.53.1indirect
crates.iowindows_i686_gnu0.53.1indirect
crates.iowindows_i686_gnullvm0.53.1indirect
crates.iowindows_i686_msvc0.53.1indirect
crates.iowindows_x86_64_gnu0.53.1indirect
crates.iowindows_x86_64_gnullvm0.53.1indirect
crates.iowindows_x86_64_msvc0.53.1indirect
crates.iowinnow1.0.4indirect
crates.iozmij1.0.23indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 89 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 2 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 v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticscrates.io.