Public record
Software health reportschema 0.14.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-19 09:18 UTC

sertit / eoreader

Remote-sensing opensource python library reading optical and SAR sensors, loading and stacking bands, clouds, DEM and spectral indices in a sensor-agnostic way.

PythonApache-2.0★ 342 stars⑂ 42 forkssince Apr 2021View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryhow this is determined
#sar#sentinel-2#sentinel-1#cosmo-skymed#terrasar#radarsat#sentinel-3#landsat#rasterio#geopandas#remote-sensing#satellite-imagery#earth-observation#pleiades#planetscope#iceye#saocom#maxar#worldview#xarray

sertit/eoreader holds a health index of 87 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (93/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (48/100). It was last updated 1 day ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

87
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.

87
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 73 is calibrated to 87 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

ICube-SERTITOrganization
20 followers9 public repossince Jun 2015

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPIeoreader0.24.24,772873 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

93Exceptional · 21% of overall

Development activity

93Exceptional
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 1 days ago
29.1/36Commit cadence — 42/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 258 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 15 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year258
human_commit_share—
days_since_last_push1
active_weeks_last_year42

Release discipline

92Excellent
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 64 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 3 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~56.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count64
latest_release_tagv0.24.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release3
mean_days_between_releases56.9
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?

71Good · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

58Moderate
How it's scored
41.1/60Stars — 342 stars
13.4/25Forks — 42 forks
3.9/15Watchers — 6 watchers
Inputs used
forks42
stars342
watchers6
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges—
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateyes

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

61Moderate
How it's scored
49.1/80Monthly downloads — 4,772 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packageseoreader
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads4,772
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?

66Good · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

34At Risk
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
1.6/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 93% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 17 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 5 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled17
top_contributor_share0.93

Issue & PR responsiveness

69Good
How it's scored
30.3/42Issue resolution — 72% of issues closed
28.6/30PR acceptance — 81/85 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
1.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 3/22 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
merged_prs81
open_issues57
closed_issues148
prs_merged_7d—
prs_decided_7d—
prs_merged_30d—
prs_decided_30d—
issue_closed_ratio0.722
closed_unmerged_prs4
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.

Ownership & stewardship

74Good
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain — verified-domain status not read for this organization
9.5/25Owner reach — 20 followers of sertit
19.3/25Track record — 9 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers20
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified—
owner_loginsertit
public_repos9
account_age_days4,058
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 3 days ago
20/20Version history — 87 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageseoreader
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish3

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

85Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

82Excellent
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
8/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 2 out of 5 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://eoreader.readthedocs.io/stable/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 20 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicssar, sentinel-2, sentinel-1, cosmo-skymed, terrasar, radarsat, sentinel-3, landsat, rasterio, geopandas, remote-sensing, satellite-imagery, earth-observation, pleiades, planetscope, iceye, saocom, maxar, worldview, xarray
has_wikino
homepagehttps://eoreader.readthedocs.io/stable/
docs_sitehttps://eoreader.readthedocs.io/stable/
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

Security posture

54Moderate
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
1/2.5CI-Tests — 2 out of 5 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 4
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0.8/7.5Code-Review — Found 3/22 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 5 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 15 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
1.5/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 3
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
6.8/7.5Vulnerabilities — 1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate5.4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

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.

48Weak · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

1Critical
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — no data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share—
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

62Moderate
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — docs/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no data
5/8Automated maintenance — dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
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_filesdocs/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share—
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice. Remaining weights renormalized.

Code legibility for models

53Moderate
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
53.2/55Manageable file sizes — 3/93 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes102,660
source_files_sampled93
oversized_source_files3

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — notebooks
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

342GitHub stars
17contributors
258commits, last 12 months
1days since last push
64releases
1bus factor
57open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.4 / 10
5.4aggregate

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 · 2026-07-19 09:16 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
4CI-Tests2 out of 5 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 4
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1Code-ReviewFound 3/22 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
10Contributorsproject has 5 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 15 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
3SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 3
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
9Vulnerabilities1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 19
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIlxml—pyproject.toml
PyPIh5netcdf—pyproject.toml
PyPIscipy—pyproject.toml
PyPIrasterio>=1.3.10pyproject.toml
PyPIxarray>=2024.06.0pyproject.toml
PyPIrioxarray>=0.15.0pyproject.toml
PyPIodc-geo>=0.5.0pyproject.toml
PyPIgeopandas>=0.14.4pyproject.toml
PyPIsertit>=1.54.0pyproject.toml
PyPIspyndex>=0.7.1pyproject.toml
PyPIpyresample—pyproject.toml
PyPIzarr—pyproject.toml
PyPIrtree—pyproject.toml
PyPIcloudpathlib>=0.15.0pyproject.toml
PyPIvalidators—pyproject.toml
PyPImethodtools—pyproject.toml
PyPIdict2xml—pyproject.toml
PyPItifffile—pyproject.toml
PyPIephem—pyproject.toml
All dependencies 48

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 19 direct and 29 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIcloudpathlib—direct
PyPIdict2xml—direct
PyPIephem—direct
PyPIgeopandas—direct
PyPIh5netcdf—direct
PyPIlxml—direct
PyPImethodtools—direct
PyPIodc-geo—direct
PyPIpyresample—direct
PyPIrasterio—direct
PyPIrioxarray—direct
PyPIrtree—direct
PyPIscipy—direct
PyPIsertit—direct
PyPIspyndex—direct
PyPItifffile—direct
PyPIvalidators—direct
PyPIxarray—direct
PyPIzarr—direct
PyPIcartopy—indirect
PyPIcoverage—indirect
PyPIcytoolz—indirect
PyPIdask—indirect
PyPIearthengine-api—indirect
PyPIeodag—indirect
PyPIfolium—indirect
PyPIgeoviews—indirect
PyPIgoogle-auth—indirect
PyPIhvplot—indirect
PyPIipython—indirect
PyPIjupyter—indirect
PyPIlinkify-it-py—indirect
PyPImatplotlib—indirect
PyPImyst-nb—indirect
PyPImyst-parser—indirect
PyPIplanetary-computer—indirect
PyPIpre-commit—indirect
PyPIpystac—indirect
PyPIpytest—indirect
PyPIpytest-cov—indirect
PyPIs3fs—indirect
PyPIshapely—indirect
PyPIsphinx—indirect
PyPIsphinx-book-theme—indirect
PyPIsphinx-copybutton—indirect
PyPIstac-asset—indirect
PyPItempenv—indirect
PyPItwine—indirect
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 sertit/eoreader. Read them side by side →

50aresys-srl/eo_productsPython package for access to Level-1 SAR Earth Observation products and auxiliary data across multiple formats and missions.Moderate81giswqs/geospatialA Python package for installing commonly used packages for geospatial analysis and data visualization with only one command.Excellent36EOCoreINT/pygeofetch Fetch any satellite data from 20+ providers with one command. USGS, Copernicus, Planet, Maxar, NASA, and more. One pipeline, any satellite.Weak84jgrss/geowombatGeoWombat: Utilities for geospatial dataExcellent71opengeos/maplibre-gl-planetary-computerAn ineractive web app for searching, visualizing, and downloading data from Planetary ComputerGood92corteva/rioxarraygeospatial xarray extension powered by rasterioExcellent

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 v0.14.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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