Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-12 20:13 UTC

serengil / deepface

A Lightweight Face Recognition and Facial Attribute Analysis (Age, Gender, Emotion and Race) Library for Python

PythonMIT★ 23,274 stars⑂ 3,167 forkssince Feb 2020View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

serengil/deepface holds a health index of 80 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (86/100) and lowest on Security (21/100). It was last updated 3 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

80
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.

80
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 68 is calibrated to 80 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Sefik Ilkin SerengilPersonal account
2,151 followers33 public repossince Apr 2016@Neo4j

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPIdeepface0.0.100-9295 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

78Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 3 days ago
15.9/36Commit cadence23/52 weeks with commits
16.5/18Commit volume67 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintainedno data
Inputs used
commits_last_year67
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push3
active_weeks_last_year23
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases20 releases published
27/36Release recencylatest release 95 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~81.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count20
latest_release_tagv0.0.100
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release95
mean_days_between_releases81.9

Community & Adoption

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

86Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
60/60Stars23,274 stars
25/25Forks3,167 forks
12.6/15Watchers187 watchers
Inputs used
forks3,167
stars23,274
watchers187
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges14
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes

Sustainability & Governance

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

70Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
4.9/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 78% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth89 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsno data
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled89
top_contributor_share0.781
How it's scored
41.7/42Issue resolution99% of issues closed
21.7/30PR acceptance261/361 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance1/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Reviewno data
Inputs used
merged_prs261
open_issues9
closed_issues1,234
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio0.993
closed_unmerged_prs100
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
24/25Owner reach2,151 followers of serengil
23.2/25Track record33 public repos, account ~10 yr old
Inputs used
followers2,151
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginserengil
public_repos33
account_age_days3,770
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 95 days ago
20/20Version history92 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesdeepface
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish95

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

78Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.pylintrc
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Testsno data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnUVYQP4h44&list=PLsS_1RYmYQQFdWqxQggXHynP1rqaYXv_E
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics17 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsface-recognition, vgg-face, facenet, openface, facial-expression-recognition, age-prediction, gender-prediction, race-classification, emotion-recognition, deep-learning, machine-learning, deepface, face-analysis, python, deepid, arcface, facial-recognition
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnUVYQP4h44&list=PLsS_1RYmYQQFdWqxQggXHynP1rqaYXv_E
docs_sitehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnUVYQP4h44&list=PLsS_1RYmYQQFdWqxQggXHynP1rqaYXv_E
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

21At Risk · 16% of overall
How it's scored
0/30Security policy (SECURITY.md)
0/25Dependabot config
0/25Dependency lockfiles
0/20CodeQL workflow
Inputs used
sourcefile_signals
lockfiles
manifestsrequirements-dev.txt, requirements.txt, requirements_additional.txt, setup.py
has_codeql_workflowno
has_security_policyno
has_dependabot_configno

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_packages51
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 pypi:deepface@0.0.100 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 51 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.

67Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
25.1/40Legible commit history47 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.47
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapMakefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config.pylintrc
11/11Static type checkingmypy.ini
10/10Reproducible environmentDockerfile
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_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsmypy.ini
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable codePython with type-check config (mypy.ini)
54.5/55Manageable file sizes1/105 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes61,035
source_files_sampled105
oversized_source_files1
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplesnotebooks
Inputs used
example_dirsnotebooks
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files
interfaces_expected_of
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

23,274GitHub stars
89contributors
67commits, last 12 months
3days since last push
20releases
1bus factor
9open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • OpenSSF Scorecard did not return a usable result (2026/08/12 20:13:10 Warning: PATs stored in env variables GITHUB_AUTH_TOKEN and GITHUB_TOKEN differ. Scorecard will use the former.); skipping Scorecard checks

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 3,167 ⇿
0Stars
3,167Forks
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.

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

2,0002,2002,4002,6002,8003,0003,2003,167352024-122025-102026-08
Major 0Minor 0Patch 7

Each point covers 2 days.

All dependencies 42

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 42 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIalbumentationsindirect
PyPIdlibindirect
PyPIfacenet-pytorchindirect
PyPIfireindirect
PyPIfire0.4.0indirect
PyPIflaskindirect
PyPIflask2.0.2indirect
PyPIflask-corsindirect
PyPIgdownindirect
PyPIgdown4.2.0indirect
PyPIgunicornindirect
PyPIgunicorn20.1.0indirect
PyPIinsightfaceindirect
PyPIkerasindirect
PyPIkeras2.7.0indirect
PyPIlightdsaindirect
PyPIlightpheindirect
PyPImediapipeindirect
PyPImtcnnindirect
PyPInumpyindirect
PyPInumpy1.22.3indirect
PyPIonnxruntimeindirect
PyPIopencv-contrib-pythonindirect
PyPIopencv-pythonindirect
PyPIopencv-python4.9.0.80indirect
PyPIpandasindirect
PyPIpandas2.0.3indirect
PyPIpillowindirect
PyPIpillow9.0.0indirect
PyPIpydanticindirect
PyPIpytestindirect
PyPIpython-dotenvindirect
PyPIrequestsindirect
PyPIretina-faceindirect
PyPItensorflowindirect
PyPItensorflow2.7.0indirect
PyPItf-kerasindirect
PyPItorchindirect
PyPItqdmindirect
PyPItqdm4.66.1indirect
PyPItyping-extensionsindirect
PyPIultralyticsindirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:deepface@0.0.100 pulls in 51 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 statisticsPyPI.