Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-16 06:51 UTC

sciencehistory / kithe

An experiment in shareable tools/components for building a digital collections app in Rails.

RubyMIT★ 18 stars⑂ 2 forkssince Oct 2018View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryNetwork servicehow this is determined
#digital-collections#samvera

sciencehistory/kithe holds a health index of 63 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (77/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (30/100). It was last updated 7 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

63
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.

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

Ownership

Science History InstituteOrganization
9 followers10 public repossince Apr 2015

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
RubyGemskithe2.19.1-3942 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

68Good · 21% of overall

Development activity

60Moderate
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 7 days ago
2.8/36Commit cadence — 4/52 weeks with commits
11.1/18Commit volume — 16 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 14 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year16
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push7
active_weeks_last_year4

Release discipline

80Excellent
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases — 35 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recency — latest release 42 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~111.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count35
latest_release_tagv2.19.1
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release42
mean_days_between_releases111.9
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?

42Weak · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

23At Risk
How it's scored
20/60Stars — 18 stars
0/25Forks — 2 forks
3.3/15Watchers — 5 watchers
Inputs used
forks2
stars18
watchers5
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

50Moderate
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized 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_badges2
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesbadge.fury.io, github.com
has_pull_request_templateno

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

63Moderate
How it's scored
50.2/80Total downloads — 67,814 downloads all-time across rubygems
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packageskithe
dependents—
ecosystemsrubygems
total_downloads67,814
monthly_downloads—
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?

56Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

24At Risk
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.9/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 96% of commits
4.1/13.5Contributor breadth — 3 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 6 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled3
top_contributor_share0.962

Issue & PR responsiveness

60Moderate
How it's scored
22.9/42Issue resolution — 55% of issues closed
29.3/30PR acceptance — 175/179 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/9 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs175
open_issues5
closed_issues6
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio0.545
closed_unmerged_prs4
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.

Ownership & stewardship

57Moderate
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
7.2/25Owner reach — 9 followers of sciencehistory
19.6/25Track record — 10 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers9
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginsciencehistory
public_repos10
account_age_days4,180

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on rubygems
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 42 days ago
20/20Version history — 39 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageskithe
ecosystemsrubygems
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish42

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

77Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

62Moderate
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
14/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 6 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://www.rubydoc.info/gems/kithe/2.19.1
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 2 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsdigital-collections, samvera
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_sitehttps://www.rubydoc.info/gems/kithe/2.19.1
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

57Moderate · 16% of overall

Security posture

46Weak
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
1.8/2.5CI-Tests — 6 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/9 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 6 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 14 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate4.6
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 advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories152
affected_packages20
assessed_packages56
unassessed_packages22
affected_by_severitycritical 6, high 11, moderate 2, low 1
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 56 resolved dependencies against OSV. 22 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.

30At Risk · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

27At Risk
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
26.7/40Legible commit history — 50 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.5
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

22At Risk
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0

Code legibility for models

55Moderate
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Ruby without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/133 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRuby
largest_source_bytes20,166
source_files_sampled133
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

18GitHub stars
3contributors
16commits, last 12 months
7days since last push
35releases
1bus factor
5open issues
RubyGemspackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 2 ⇿
0Stars
2Forks
7Releases

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.

111222212021-012021-092022-06
Major 0Minor 5Patch 2

Each point covers 2 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.6 / 10
4.6aggregate

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 · 2026-09-16 06:51 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
7CI-Tests6 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/9 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 6 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained14 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
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 78

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 78 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
RubyGemsactioncable5.2.1indirect
RubyGemsactionmailer5.2.1indirect
RubyGemsactionpack5.2.1indirect
RubyGemsactionview5.2.1indirect
RubyGemsactivejob5.2.1indirect
RubyGemsactivemodel5.2.1indirect
RubyGemsactiverecord5.2.1indirect
RubyGemsactivestorage5.2.1indirect
RubyGemsactivesupport5.2.1indirect
RubyGemsappraisal—indirect
RubyGemsarel9.0.0indirect
RubyGemsattr_json—indirect
RubyGemsattr_json0.3.0indirect
RubyGemsbuilder3.2.3indirect
RubyGemsbyebug10.0.2indirect
RubyGemscoderay1.1.2indirect
RubyGemsconcurrent-ruby1.0.5indirect
RubyGemscrass1.0.4indirect
RubyGemsdb-query-matchers—indirect
RubyGemsdiff-lcs1.3indirect
RubyGemsdimensions—indirect
RubyGemserubi1.7.1indirect
RubyGemsfactory_bot4.11.1indirect
RubyGemsfactory_bot_rails4.11.1indirect
RubyGemsfastimage—indirect
RubyGemsfx—indirect
RubyGemsglobalid0.4.1indirect
RubyGemsi18n1.1.0indirect
RubyGemsloofah2.2.2indirect
RubyGemsmail2.7.0indirect
RubyGemsmarcel—indirect
RubyGemsmarcel0.3.3indirect
RubyGemsmethod_source0.9.0indirect
RubyGemsmimemagic0.3.2indirect
RubyGemsmini_mime—indirect
RubyGemsmini_mime1.0.1indirect
RubyGemsmini_portile22.3.0indirect
RubyGemsminitest5.11.3indirect
RubyGemsnio4r2.3.1indirect
RubyGemsnokogiri1.8.4indirect
RubyGemspdf-reader—indirect
RubyGemspg—indirect
RubyGemspg1.1.3indirect
RubyGemspry0.11.3indirect
RubyGemspry-byebug3.6.0indirect
RubyGemsrack2.0.5indirect
RubyGemsrack-test1.1.0indirect
RubyGemsrails—indirect
RubyGemsrails5.2.1indirect
RubyGemsrails-dom-testing2.0.3indirect
RubyGemsrails-html-sanitizer1.0.4indirect
RubyGemsrailties5.2.1indirect
RubyGemsrake12.3.1indirect
RubyGemsrsolr—indirect
RubyGemsrspec-core3.8.0indirect
RubyGemsrspec-expectations3.8.1indirect
RubyGemsrspec-mocks3.8.0indirect
RubyGemsrspec-rails—indirect
RubyGemsrspec-rails3.8.0indirect
RubyGemsrspec-support3.8.0indirect
RubyGemsruby-progressbar—indirect
RubyGemssane_patch—indirect
RubyGemsshrine—indirect
RubyGemsshrine-url—indirect
RubyGemssimple_form—indirect
RubyGemssprockets3.7.2indirect
RubyGemssprockets-rails3.2.1indirect
RubyGemsthor0.20.0indirect
RubyGemsthread_safe0.3.6indirect
RubyGemstraject—indirect
RubyGemstty-command—indirect
RubyGemstzinfo1.2.5indirect
RubyGemswebmock—indirect
RubyGemswebsocket-driver0.7.0indirect
RubyGemswebsocket-extensions0.1.3indirect
RubyGemsyard0.9.16indirect
RubyGemsyard-activesupport-concern—indirect
RubyGemsyard-activesupport-concern0.0.1indirect
Dependency advisories 20

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 56 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 20 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 22 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
activerecord5.2.1indirectcritical48.0.2.1
activestorage5.2.1indirectcritical118.1.3.1
activesupport5.2.1indirectcritical78.1.2.1
nokogiri1.8.4indirectcritical421.19.4
rack2.0.5indirectcritical373.2.6
railties5.2.1indirectcritical15.2.2.1
actionmailer5.2.1indirecthigh17.2.1.1
actionpack5.2.1indirecthigh128.0.0.1
actionview5.2.1indirecthigh88.1.2.1
activejob5.2.1indirecthigh15.2.1.1
concurrent-ruby1.0.5indirecthigh31.3.7
loofah2.2.2indirecthigh62.25.2
rails-html-sanitizer1.0.4indirecthigh61.7.1
tzinfo1.2.5indirecthigh11.2.10
websocket-driver0.7.0indirecthigh40.8.2
websocket-extensions0.1.3indirecthigh10.1.5
yard0.9.16indirecthigh40.9.44
mail2.7.0indirectmoderate12.9.1
rake12.3.1indirectmoderate112.3.3
globalid0.4.1indirectlow11.0.1

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.

The message is kept through sign-in.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with sciencehistory/kithe. Read them side by side →

96samvera/hyraxHyrax is a Ruby on Rails Engine built by the Samvera community. Hyrax provides a foundation for creating many different digital repository applications.Exceptional81notch8/iiif_printA gem for Hyrax/Samvera for displaying PDF pages in a IIIF Compliant viewerExcellent100apache/arrowApache Arrow is the universal columnar format and multi-language toolbox for fast data interchange and in-memory analyticsExceptional99opf/openprojectOpenProject is the leading open source project management software for product, project and portfolio management. A powerful Jira alternative with agile planning, issue tracking, roadmaps, Gantt charts, time tracking, collaboration features, and more. Available on premises or in the cloud. ⭐ Star us on GitHubExceptional99fluent/fluentdFluentd: Unified Logging Layer (project under CNCF)Exceptional99grpc/grpcC++ based gRPC (C++, Python, Ruby, Objective-C, PHP, C#)Exceptional

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 — RubyGems.