Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-19 15:18 UTC

shikanime-labs / wharf

Build OCI images from Nix flakes

GoAGPL-3.0★ 0 stars⑂ 1 forksince Nov 2025View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolhow this is determined

shikanime-labs/wharf holds a health index of 67 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on AI Readiness (85/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (31/100). It was last updated 2 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

67
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.

67
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 61 is calibrated to 67 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Shikanime LabsOrganization
2 followers25 public repossince Jun 2026

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

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

84Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 2 days ago
10.4/36Commit cadence15/52 weeks with commits
17/18Commit volume78 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 6 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year78
human_commit_share0.897
days_since_last_push2
active_weeks_last_year15

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases2 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 53 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~0.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count2
latest_release_tagv0.1.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release53
mean_days_between_releases0.4
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?

31At Risk · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars0 stars
0/25Forks1 forks
0/15Watchers0 watchers
Inputs used
forks1
stars0
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (AGPL-3.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

35Weak · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth1 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 8 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1
How it's scored
30/42Issue resolution71% of issues closed
15.3/30PR acceptance48/94 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance0/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs48
open_issues2
closed_issues5
prs_merged_7d2
prs_decided_7d2
prs_merged_30d18
prs_decided_30d22
issue_closed_ratio0.714
closed_unmerged_prs46
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domain
3.4/25Owner reach2 followers of shikanime-labs
10.8/25Track record25 public repos, account ~0 yr old
Inputs used
followers2
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginshikanime-labs
public_repos25
account_age_days97

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

74Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows7 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.golangci.yaml, .golangci.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests22 out of 22 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics3 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicscontainer, docker, nix
has_wikino
homepage
docs_site
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

77Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
6.8/7.5Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
3/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests22 out of 22 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 8 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingno data
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 6 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
4.5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
7.5/7.5Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate7.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Fuzzing, Packaging, Signed-Releases. 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_packages44
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 44 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.

85Excellent · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsAGENTS.md, vendor/go.opentelemetry.io/otel/AGENTS.md, vendor/go.opentelemetry.io/otel/CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history55 of 70 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.786
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md, vendor/go.opentelemetry.io/otel/AGENTS.md, vendor/go.opentelemetry.io/otel/CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes7,134
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapvendor/github.com/sagikazarmark/locafero/justfile, vendor/github.com/spf13/cast/Makefile, vendor/github.com/spf13/cobra/Makefile, vendor/github.com/spf13/viper/Makefile, vendor/go.opentelemetry.io/otel/Makefile, vendor/google.golang.org/grpc/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config.golangci.yaml, .golangci.yml
11/11Static type checkingGo (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentDockerfile, Nix, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 78
8/8Automated maintenance8 of the last 78 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixyes
has_testsyes
lockfilesgo.sum
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesvendor/github.com/sagikazarmark/locafero/justfile, vendor/github.com/spf13/cast/Makefile, vendor/github.com/spf13/cobra/Makefile, vendor/github.com/spf13/viper/Makefile, vendor/go.opentelemetry.io/otel/Makefile, vendor/google.golang.org/grpc/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsgo.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share0.103
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeGo (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/15 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageGo
largest_source_bytes11,052
source_files_sampled15
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

0GitHub stars
1contributors
78commits, last 12 months
2days since last push
2releases
1bus factor
2open issues
Gopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Could not fetch go package 'github.com/shikanime-studio/wharf' from its registry

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.1 / 10
7.1aggregate

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 · 2026-09-19 15:18 UTC

9Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
4Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests22 out of 22 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 8 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
n/aFuzzinginternal error: internal error: Client.Search.Code: http.Get: Get "https://oss-fuzz-build-logs.storage.googleapis.com/status.json": dial tcp [2a00:1450:4001:c0f::cf]:443: connect: network is unreachable
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 6 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
9Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 8
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Gogithub.com/google/go-containerregistryv0.21.9go.mod
Gogithub.com/spf13/cobrav1.10.2go.mod
Gogithub.com/spf13/viperv1.21.0go.mod
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/otelv1.45.0go.mod
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/otel/exporters/otlp/otlptrace/otlptracegrpcv1.45.0go.mod
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/otel/sdkv1.45.0go.mod
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/otel/tracev1.45.0go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/syncv0.22.0go.mod
All dependencies 44

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 8 direct and 36 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Gogithub.com/google/go-containerregistryv0.21.9direct
Gogithub.com/spf13/cobrav1.10.2direct
Gogithub.com/spf13/viperv1.21.0direct
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/otelv1.45.0direct
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/otel/exporters/otlp/otlptrace/otlptracegrpcv1.45.0direct
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/otel/sdkv1.45.0direct
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/otel/tracev1.45.0direct
Gogolang.org/x/syncv0.22.0direct
Gogithub.com/cenkalti/backoff/v5v5.0.3indirect
Gogithub.com/cespare/xxhash/v2v2.3.0indirect
Gogithub.com/davecgh/go-spewv1.1.2-0.20180830191138-d8f796af33ccindirect
Gogithub.com/docker/cliv29.8.1+incompatibleindirect
Gogithub.com/docker/docker-credential-helpersv0.9.4indirect
Gogithub.com/fsnotify/fsnotifyv1.9.0indirect
Gogithub.com/go-logr/logrv1.4.4indirect
Gogithub.com/go-logr/stdrv1.2.2indirect
Gogithub.com/go-viper/mapstructure/v2v2.4.0indirect
Gogithub.com/google/uuidv1.6.0indirect
Gogithub.com/grpc-ecosystem/grpc-gateway/v2v2.29.0indirect
Gogithub.com/inconshreveable/mousetrapv1.1.0indirect
Gogithub.com/klauspost/compressv1.19.1indirect
Gogithub.com/opencontainers/go-digestv1.0.0indirect
Gogithub.com/opencontainers/image-specv1.1.1indirect
Gogithub.com/pelletier/go-toml/v2v2.2.4indirect
Gogithub.com/pmezard/go-difflibv1.0.1-0.20181226105442-5d4384ee4fb2indirect
Gogithub.com/sagikazarmark/locaferov0.12.0indirect
Gogithub.com/sirupsen/logrusv1.9.4indirect
Gogithub.com/spf13/aferov1.15.0indirect
Gogithub.com/spf13/castv1.10.0indirect
Gogithub.com/spf13/pflagv1.0.10indirect
Gogithub.com/subosito/gotenvv1.6.0indirect
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/auto/sdkv1.2.1indirect
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/otel/exporters/otlp/otlptracev1.45.0indirect
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/otel/metricv1.45.0indirect
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/proto/otlpv1.11.0indirect
Gogo.yaml.in/yaml/v3v3.0.4indirect
Gogolang.org/x/netv0.58.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/sysv0.47.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/textv0.41.0indirect
Gogoogle.golang.org/genproto/googleapis/apiv0.0.0-20260803160001-6ac0973c030dindirect
Gogoogle.golang.org/genproto/googleapis/rpcv0.0.0-20260803160001-6ac0973c030dindirect
Gogoogle.golang.org/grpcv1.83.2indirect
Gogoogle.golang.org/protobufv1.36.11indirect
Gogotest.tools/v3v3.5.2indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 44 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 v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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