Public record
Software health reportschema 0.26.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-22 04:59 UTC

serdarciplak / BlazorMonaco

Blazor component for Microsoft's Monaco Editor which powers Visual Studio Code.

C#MIT★ 587 stars⑂ 114 forkssince Apr 2020View on GitHub ↗

serdarciplak/BlazorMonaco holds a health index of 50 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Vitality (67/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (33/100). It was last updated 23 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

50
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.

50
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 50 is calibrated to 50 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Serdar CiplakPersonal account
26 followers1 public reposince Aug 2019

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

67Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recencylast push 23 days ago
3.5/36Commit cadence5/52 weeks with commits
13.1/18Commit volume28 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained11 commit(s) and 7 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year28
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push23
active_weeks_last_year5
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases5 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 23 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~259.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count5
latest_release_tagv3.5.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release23
mean_days_between_releases259.2
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?

60Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
44.9/60Stars587 stars
17.1/25Forks114 forks
5.8/15Watchers12 watchers
Inputs used
forks114
stars587
watchers12
growth_stateorganic
growth_factor_pct100
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized 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_badges
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

43Weak · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
3.2/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 86% of commits
9.5/13.5Contributor breadth7 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled7
top_contributor_share0.856
How it's scored
38.3/42Issue resolution91% of issues closed
17.8/30PR acceptance32/54 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
1.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 2/11 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
merged_prs32
open_issues12
closed_issues125
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.912
closed_unmerged_prs22
first_time_authors_30d
first_time_prs_merged_30d
first_time_prs_decided_30d
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
10.3/25Owner reach26 followers of serdarciplak
14.2/25Track record1 public repos, account ~6 yr old
Inputs used
followers26
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginserdarciplak
public_repos1
account_age_days2,525
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

40Weak · 19% of overall
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests0 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsno
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://serdarciplak.github.io/BlazorMonaco/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics6 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsmonaco-editor, blazor, blazor-component, code, editor, formatter
has_wikino
homepagehttps://serdarciplak.github.io/BlazorMonaco/
docs_sitehttps://serdarciplak.github.io/BlazorMonaco/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

45Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
0/7.5Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
0/2.5CI-Tests0 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0.8/7.5Code-ReviewFound 2/11 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
0.8/2.5Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained11 commit(s) and 7 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesno data
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-Permissionsno data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated12
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive6
scorecard_aggregate3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. 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_packages16
unassessed_packages0
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 16 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.

33At Risk · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
13.9/40Legible commit history26 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.26
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrapBlazorMonaco/BlazorMonaco.csproj, SampleWasmApp/SampleWasmApp.csproj, SampleWebApp/SampleWebApp.csproj (toolchain convention, no task runner)
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingC# (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesno data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsBlazorMonaco/BlazorMonaco.csproj, SampleWasmApp/SampleWasmApp.csproj, SampleWebApp/SampleWebApp.csproj
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeC# (statically typed)
45.9/55Manageable file sizes44/266 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageC#
largest_source_bytes7,011,550
source_files_sampled266
oversized_source_files44

Key facts

587GitHub stars
7contributors
28commits, last 12 months
23days since last push
5releases
1bus factor
12open issues
NuGetpackage ecosystems

More detail

Star and fork history 587 ★ / 114 ⇿
587Stars
114Forks
5Releases

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.

0100200300400500600586111132020-042023-062026-07
Major 0Minor 5Patch 0

Each point covers 6 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.0 / 10
3.0aggregate

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 · 2026-07-22 04:59 UTC

0Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
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
0CI-Tests0 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1Code-ReviewFound 2/11 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained11 commit(s) and 7 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 16
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components3.1.10BlazorMonaco/BlazorMonaco.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components.Web3.1.10BlazorMonaco/BlazorMonaco.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components5.0.0BlazorMonaco/BlazorMonaco.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components.Web5.0.0BlazorMonaco/BlazorMonaco.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components6.0.25BlazorMonaco/BlazorMonaco.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components.Web6.0.25BlazorMonaco/BlazorMonaco.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components7.0.14BlazorMonaco/BlazorMonaco.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components.Web7.0.14BlazorMonaco/BlazorMonaco.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components8.0.0BlazorMonaco/BlazorMonaco.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components.Web8.0.0BlazorMonaco/BlazorMonaco.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components9.0.0BlazorMonaco/BlazorMonaco.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components.Web9.0.0BlazorMonaco/BlazorMonaco.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components10.0.0BlazorMonaco/BlazorMonaco.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components.Web10.0.0BlazorMonaco/BlazorMonaco.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components.WebAssembly10.0.0SampleWasmApp/SampleWasmApp.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components.WebAssembly.DevServer10.0.0SampleWasmApp/SampleWasmApp.csproj
All dependencies 16

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 16 direct and 0 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components10.0.0direct
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components3.1.10direct
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components5.0.0direct
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components6.0.25direct
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components7.0.14direct
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components8.0.0direct
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components9.0.0direct
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components.Web10.0.0direct
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components.Web3.1.10direct
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components.Web5.0.0direct
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components.Web6.0.25direct
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components.Web7.0.14direct
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components.Web8.0.0direct
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components.Web9.0.0direct
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components.WebAssembly10.0.0direct
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Components.WebAssembly.DevServer10.0.0direct
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 16 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.

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 v0.26.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics.