Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-11 08:05 UTC

servo / rust-cssparser

Rust implementation of CSS Syntax Level 3

RustMPL-2.0★ 865 stars⑂ 149 forkssince Jul 2013View on GitHub ↗

servo/rust-cssparser holds a health index of 69 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (75/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (48/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

overall / 100

Good

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.

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)

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 62 is calibrated to 69 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

ServoOrganization

1,269 followers193 public repossince Oct 2012

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

Package ecosystems

Registry	Package	Version	Downloads / mo	Versions	Last publish	Tags
crates.io	cssparser	0.37.0	8,293,833	109	146 days ago	css parser syntax
crates.io	cssparser-color	0.5.0	316,569	5	146 days ago	—
crates.io	cssparser-macros	0.7.0	6,662,966	13	146 days ago	—

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

54Moderate · 21% of overall

Development activity

55Moderate

How it's scored

36/36	Push recency — last push 0 days ago
6.2/36	Commit cadence — 9/52 weeks with commits
11.7/18	Commit volume — 19 commits in the last year
1/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1

Inputs used

commits_last_year	19
human_commit_share	1
days_since_last_push	0
active_weeks_last_year	9

Release discipline

52Moderate

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 1 releases published
7.2/36	Release recency — latest release 508 days ago
12.6/27	Release cadence — cadence unknown (single release)
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data

Inputs used

releases_count	1
latest_release_tag	v0.35.0
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	508
mean_days_between_releases	—

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?

72Good · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

73Good

How it's scored

47.6/60	Stars — 865 stars
18.1/25	Forks — 149 forks
7.6/15	Watchers — 24 watchers

Inputs used

forks	149
stars	865
watchers	24
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

50Moderate

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
22.5/22.5	License — recognized license (MPL-2.0)
0/18	CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5	Code of conduct
0/7.2	Issue template
0/6.3	PR template

Inputs used

has_readme	yes
has_license	yes
readme_badges	1
has_contributing	no
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	no
readme_badge_services	github.com
has_pull_request_template	no

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

100Exceptional

How it's scored

80/80	Monthly downloads — 15,273,368 downloads/month across crates
0/20	Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem

Inputs used

packages	cssparser, cssparser-color, cssparser-macros
dependents	—
ecosystems	crates
total_downloads	137,413,161
monthly_downloads	15,273,368
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?

75Good · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

42Weak

How it's scored

9/54	Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
9.6/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 57% of commits
13.5/13.5	Contributor breadth — 67 contributors
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 32 contributing companies or organizations

Inputs used

bus_factor	1
contributors_sampled	67
top_contributor_share	0.573

Issue & PR responsiveness

73Good

How it's scored

33.4/42	Issue resolution — 80% of issues closed
26.5/30	PR acceptance — 307/347 decided PRs merged
0/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — 0/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
13.5/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 27/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9

Inputs used

merged_prs	307
open_issues	17
closed_issues	66
prs_merged_7d	1
prs_decided_7d	1
prs_merged_30d	2
prs_decided_30d	3
issue_closed_ratio	0.795
closed_unmerged_prs	40
first_time_authors_30d	1
first_time_prs_merged_30d	0
first_time_prs_decided_30d	1

Ownership & stewardship

97Exceptional

How it's scored

30/30	Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20	Verified domain — verified-domain status not read for this organization
22.3/25	Owner reach — 1,269 followers of servo
25/25	Track record — 193 public repos, account ~13 yr old

Inputs used

followers	1,269
owner_type	Organization
is_verified	—
owner_login	servo
public_repos	193
account_age_days	5,047

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional

How it's scored

25/25	Published & resolvable — 3 package(s) on crates
35/35	Publish recency — latest publish 146 days ago
20/20	Version history — 109 published versions
20/20	Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked

Inputs used

packages	cssparser, cssparser-color, cssparser-macros
ecosystems	crates
any_deprecated	no
min_days_since_publish	146

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

52Moderate · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

34At Risk

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
0/24	Tests present
0/16	Linter config
0/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4	.editorconfig
10/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 17 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5

Inputs used

has_ci	yes
has_tests	no
has_editorconfig	no
has_linter_config	no
has_precommit_config	no

Documentation

80Excellent

How it's scored

30/30	README
25/25	Documentation directory
15/15	Documentation / homepage site — https://drafts.csswg.org/css-syntax/
10/10	Repository description
0/10	Topics
0/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	—
has_wiki	no
homepage	https://drafts.csswg.org/css-syntax/
docs_site	https://drafts.csswg.org/css-syntax/
has_readme	yes
has_docs_dir	yes
has_description	yes

Security

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

59Moderate · 16% of overall

Security posture

51Moderate

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5	Branch-Protection — no data
1.2/2.5	CI-Tests — 17 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
0/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6.8/7.5	Code-Review — Found 27/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
2.5/2.5	Contributors — project has 32 contributing companies or organizations
10/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5	Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
5/5	Fuzzing — project is fuzzed
2.5/2.5	License — license file detected
0.8/7.5	Maintained — 2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
0/5	Packaging — no data
0/5	Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5	SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5	Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5	Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5	Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6.8/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 1 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	15
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	3
scorecard_aggregate	5.1

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

89Excellent

How it's scored

26.6/35	Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: difference 2.0.0 (unknown)
25/25	Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
37.2/40	No advisories left outstanding — 1 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 2,059 days ago

Inputs used

source	osv
advisories	1
affected_packages	1
assessed_packages	24
unassessed_packages	0
affected_by_severity	unknown 1
direct_affected_packages	1

Matched the crates:cssparser@0.37.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 24 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.

48Weak · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

40Weak

How it's scored

0/45	Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40	Legible commit history — 77 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	no
llms_txt_url	—
legible_history_share	0.77
agent_instruction_files	—
agent_instruction_max_bytes	—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

34At Risk

How it's scored

12.6/18	One-command bootstrap — Cargo.toml, color/Cargo.toml, fuzz/Cargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
0/22	Automated tests
0/11	Lint / format config
11/11	Static type checking — Rust (statically typed)
10/10	Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10	Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8	Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

has_nix	no
has_tests	no
lockfiles	Cargo.lock
has_dockerfile	no
typed_language	yes
bootstrap_files	—
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	no
typecheck_configs	—
agent_commit_share	0
toolchain_manifests	Cargo.toml, color/Cargo.toml, fuzz/Cargo.toml, macros/Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share	0

Code legibility for models

100Exceptional

How it's scored

45/45	Type-checkable code — Rust (statically typed)
55/55	Manageable file sizes — 0/22 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	Rust
largest_source_bytes	48,086
source_files_sampled	22
oversized_source_files	0

Key facts

865GitHub stars

67contributors

19commits, last 12 months

0days since last push

1releases

1bus factor

17open 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 ★ / 149 ⇿

0Stars

149Forks

1Releases

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.

Major 0Minor 1Patch 0

Each point covers 12 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.1 / 10

5.1aggregate

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 · 2026-08-11 08:04 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
n/a	Branch-Protection	internal 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
5	CI-Tests	17 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
0	CII-Best-Practices	no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
9	Code-Review	Found 27/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
10	Contributors	project has 32 contributing companies or organizations
10	Dangerous-Workflow	no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0	Dependency-Update-Tool	no update tool detected
10	Fuzzing	project is fuzzed
10	License	license file detected
1	Maintained	2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
n/a	Packaging	packaging workflow not detected
0	Pinned-Dependencies	dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0	SAST	SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0	Security-Policy	security policy file not detected
n/a	Signed-Releases	no releases found
0	Token-Permissions	detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
9	Vulnerabilities	1 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 11

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
crates.io	dtoa-short	`0.3`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	itoa	`1.0`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	smallvec	`1.0`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	cssparser-macros	`0.7.0`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	malloc_size_of	`0.1`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	phf	`0.13.1`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	serde	`1.0`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	cssparser	`0.37`	color/Cargo.toml
crates.io	serde	`1.0`	color/Cargo.toml
crates.io	quote	`1.0.29`	macros/Cargo.toml
crates.io	syn	`>=2,<4`	macros/Cargo.toml

All dependencies 41

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 16 direct and 25 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
crates.io	cssparser	`—`	direct
crates.io	cssparser-macros	`—`	direct
crates.io	dtoa-short	`—`	direct
crates.io	dtoa-short	`0.3.3`	direct
crates.io	itoa	`—`	direct
crates.io	itoa	`0.4.7`	direct
crates.io	malloc_size_of	`—`	direct
crates.io	phf	`—`	direct
crates.io	phf	`0.8.0`	direct
crates.io	quote	`—`	direct
crates.io	quote	`1.0.9`	direct
crates.io	serde	`—`	direct
crates.io	smallvec	`—`	direct
crates.io	smallvec	`1.6.1`	direct
crates.io	syn	`—`	direct
crates.io	syn	`1.0.63`	direct
crates.io	arbitrary	`1.0.0`	indirect
crates.io	cc	`1.0.67`	indirect
crates.io	cfg-if	`1.0.0`	indirect
crates.io	difference	`—`	indirect
crates.io	dtoa	`0.4.7`	indirect
crates.io	encoding_rs	`—`	indirect
crates.io	getrandom	`0.1.16`	indirect
crates.io	libc	`0.2.88`	indirect
crates.io	libfuzzer-sys	`0.4.0`	indirect
crates.io	matches	`0.1.8`	indirect
crates.io	phf_generator	`0.8.0`	indirect
crates.io	phf_macros	`0.8.0`	indirect
crates.io	phf_shared	`0.8.0`	indirect
crates.io	ppv-lite86	`0.2.10`	indirect
crates.io	proc-macro-hack	`0.5.19`	indirect
crates.io	proc-macro2	`1.0.24`	indirect
crates.io	rand	`0.7.3`	indirect
crates.io	rand_chacha	`0.2.2`	indirect
crates.io	rand_core	`0.5.1`	indirect
crates.io	rand_hc	`0.2.0`	indirect
crates.io	rand_pcg	`0.2.1`	indirect
crates.io	serde_json	`—`	indirect
crates.io	siphasher	`0.3.3`	indirect
crates.io	unicode-xid	`0.2.1`	indirect
crates.io	wasi	`0.9.0+wasi-snapshot-preview1`	indirect

Dependency advisories 1

Installing crates:cssparser@0.37.0 pulls in 24 packages, direct and transitive: 1 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct dependencies.

Package	Version	Relation	Severity	Advisories	Fixed in
difference	`2.0.0`	direct	unknown	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.

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 statistics — crates.io.

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Key facts

Data collection warnings

More detail

Feedback

Related records