Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-13 21:52 UTC

rust-windowing / keyboard-types

Types to define keyboard related events

RustApache-2.0★ 71 stars⑂ 17 forkssince Jul 2017View on GitHub ↗

rust-windowing/keyboard-types holds a health index of 59 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (78/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (34/100). It was last updated 240 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

59
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.

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

Ownership

Rust WindowingOrganization
314 followers21 public repossince Apr 2019

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
crates.iokeyboard-types0.8.33,933,63019315 days agoeventinputkeyboardwebdriver

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

36Weak · 21% of overall
How it's scored
3.6/36Push recencylast push 240 days ago
2.1/36Commit cadence3/52 weeks with commits
8.1/18Commit volume7 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year7
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push240
active_weeks_last_year3
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases4 releases published
16.2/36Release recencylatest release 315 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~52.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count4
latest_release_tagv0.8.3
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release315
mean_days_between_releases52.1
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?

60Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
29.9/60Stars71 stars
10/25Forks17 forks
2.7/15Watchers4 watchers
Inputs used
forks17
stars71
watchers4
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (Apache-2.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges2
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads3,933,630 downloads/month across crates
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packageskeyboard-types
dependents
ecosystemscrates
total_downloads30,149,903
monthly_downloads3,933,630
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
15/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 33% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth12 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 9 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled12
top_contributor_share0.333
How it's scored
31.9/42Issue resolution76% of issues closed
25.5/30PR acceptance57/67 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
9/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 17/25 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
merged_prs57
open_issues7
closed_issues22
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.759
closed_unmerged_prs10
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
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
18/25Owner reach314 followers of rust-windowing
21.8/25Track record21 public repos, account ~7 yr old
Inputs used
followers314
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginrust-windowing
public_repos21
account_age_days2,685
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on crates
26/35Publish recencylatest publish 315 days ago
20/20Version history19 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageskeyboard-types
ecosystemscrates
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish315

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

55Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows1 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
8/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests10 out of 24 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsno
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://docs.rs/keyboard-types
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics2 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsrust, uievents
has_wikino
homepagehttps://docs.rs/keyboard-types
docs_sitehttps://docs.rs/keyboard-types
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

54Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
1/2.5CI-Tests10 out of 24 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 4
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
4.5/7.5Code-ReviewFound 17/25 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 9 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
0/7.5Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
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
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not 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_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate4.2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, 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
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriesno indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages8
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the crates:keyboard-types@0.8.3 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 8 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.

34At Risk · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
16.2/40Legible commit history30 of 99 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.303
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrapCargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingRust (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 99
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_testsno
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeRust (statically typed)
50.4/55Manageable file sizes1/12 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes69,673
source_files_sampled12
oversized_source_files1

Key facts

71GitHub stars
12contributors
7commits, last 12 months
240days since last push
4releases
2bus factor
7open issues
crates.iopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 17 ⇿
0Stars
17Forks
4Releases

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.

0481216201722020-022023-022026-03
Major 0Minor 1Patch 3

Each point covers 6 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.2 / 10
4.2aggregate

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 · 2026-08-13 21:51 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal 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
4CI-Tests10 out of 24 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 4
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6Code-ReviewFound 17/25 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
10Contributorsproject has 9 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
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
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 3
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.iobitflags2Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde1.0.0Cargo.toml
crates.iounicode-segmentation1.2.0Cargo.toml
All dependencies 3

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 3 direct and 0 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
crates.iobitflagsdirect
crates.ioserdedirect
crates.iounicode-segmentationdirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing crates:keyboard-types@0.8.3 pulls in 8 packages, direct and transitive: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct dependencies.

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.