Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-13 09:00 UTC

sillsdev / icu

Fork of the ICU project with additional branches that add nuget packaging. The FieldWorks branch has some FieldWorks specific enhancements.

C++ · Java · CNo license detected★ 0 stars⑂ 2 forkssince May 2020forkView on GitHub ↗

sillsdev/icu holds a health index of 47 out of 100, placing it in the Weak band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (87/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (1/100). It was last updated today. 4 contributors account for most of its recent work.

47
overall / 100
Weak

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.

47
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 48 is calibrated to 47 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

SIL LSDevOrganization
182 followers305 public repossince Oct 2011

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?

37Weak · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
0.7/36Commit cadence1/52 weeks with commits
2.7/18Commit volume1 commits in the last year
1/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
commits_last_year1
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year1
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases1 version tags (no GitHub releases)
0/36Release recencylatest release 2,001 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencecadence unknown (single release)
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count1
latest_release_tagv54.1.31-fw
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release2,001
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?

1Critical · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars0 stars
0/25Forks2 forks
0/15Watchers0 watchers
Inputs used
forks2
stars0
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
0/22.5README
0/22.5Licenseno license file detected
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeno
has_licenseno
readme_badges4
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

87Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
43.2/54Bus factor4 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
16.9/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 25% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth99 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 19 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor4
contributors_sampled99
top_contributor_share0.248
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolutionno issues or no data
28.8/30PR acceptance25/26 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance1/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
10.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 9/12 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
merged_prs25
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d2
prs_decided_7d2
prs_merged_30d2
prs_decided_30d2
issue_closed_ratio
closed_unmerged_prs1
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
16.3/25Owner reach182 followers of sillsdev
25/25Track record305 public repos, account ~14 yr old
Inputs used
followers182
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginsillsdev
public_repos305
account_age_days5,429
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

47Weak · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
4/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests2 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
0/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttp://site.icu-project.org/
0/10Repository description
0/10Topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikino
homepagehttp://site.icu-project.org/
docs_sitehttp://site.icu-project.org/
has_readmeno
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionno

Security

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

58Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
0.5/2.5CI-Tests2 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
5.2/7.5Code-ReviewFound 9/12 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 19 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
5/5Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
0/2.5Licenselicense file not detected
0.8/7.5Maintained2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
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
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6/7.5Vulnerabilities2 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate4.7
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, 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
advisories5
affected_packages3
assessed_packages14
unassessed_packages11
affected_by_severityhigh 1, moderate 2
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 14 resolved dependencies against OSV. 11 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list. 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.

55Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
14.4/40Legible commit history27 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.27
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapicu4c/source/samples/break/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/case/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/citer/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/coll/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/csdet/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/datecal/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/datefmt/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/legacy/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/msgfmt/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/numfmt/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/props/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/strsrch/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/translit/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/uciter8/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/ucnv/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/udata/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/ufortune/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/ufortune/resources/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/ugrep/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/uresb/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/ustring/Makefile, icu4c/source/tools/gencolusb/Makefile, icu4c/source/tools/genren/Makefile, tools/multi/Makefile, tools/multi/c/Makefile, tools/multi/proj/chello/Makefile, tools/multi/proj/icu4cscan/Makefile, tools/multi/proj/provider/Makefile, tools/release/c/os-mapping/Makefile, tools/release/java/Makefile, tools/unicode/c/genregexcasing/Makefile, vendor/double-conversion/upstream/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingC++ (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
2/10Demonstrated agent practice1 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesicu4c/source/samples/break/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/case/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/citer/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/coll/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/csdet/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/datecal/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/datefmt/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/legacy/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/msgfmt/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/numfmt/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/props/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/strsrch/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/translit/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/uciter8/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/ucnv/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/udata/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/ufortune/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/ufortune/resources/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/ugrep/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/uresb/Makefile, icu4c/source/samples/ustring/Makefile, icu4c/source/tools/gencolusb/Makefile, icu4c/source/tools/genren/Makefile, tools/multi/Makefile, tools/multi/c/Makefile, tools/multi/proj/chello/Makefile, tools/multi/proj/icu4cscan/Makefile, tools/multi/proj/provider/Makefile, tools/release/c/os-mapping/Makefile, tools/release/java/Makefile, tools/unicode/c/genregexcasing/Makefile, vendor/double-conversion/upstream/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0.01
toolchain_manifestsicu4j/maven/icu4j-charset/pom.xml, icu4j/maven/icu4j-localespi/pom.xml, icu4j/maven/icu4j/pom.xml, tools/cldr/cldr-to-icu/pom.xml, tools/cldr/lib/pom.xml, tools/release/java/pom.xml
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeC++ (statically typed)
51/55Manageable file sizes218/3,015 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageC++
largest_source_bytes428,052
source_files_sampled3,015
oversized_source_files218
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 examplesdemos, samples
Inputs used
example_dirsdemos, samples
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

0GitHub stars
99contributors
1commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
1releases
4bus factor
0open issues
RubyGemspackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Community profile unavailable

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 2 ⇿
0Stars
2Forks
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.

111222212020-062023-072026-07
Major 0Minor 0Patch 0

Each point covers 6 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.7 / 10
4.7aggregate

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 · 2026-08-13 08:59 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
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
2CI-Tests2 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7Code-ReviewFound 9/12 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
10Contributorsproject has 19 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
10Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
0Licenselicense file not detected
1Maintained2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
8Vulnerabilities2 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 25

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 25 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Mavencom.google.guava:guava30.0-jreindirect
Mavencom.google.truth.extensions:truth-java8-extension1.0indirect
Mavencom.google.truth:truth1.0indirect
Mavencom.ibm.icu:icu4jindirect
Mavencom.ibm.icu:icu4j-for-cldr70.0.1-SNAPSHOT-cldr-2021-08-11indirect
Mavenorg.apache.ant:ant1.10.11indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-assembly-plugin3.1.1indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-compiler-plugin3.5.1indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-shade-plugin3.2.1indirect
Mavenorg.codehaus.mojo:exec-maven-plugin1.6.0indirect
Mavenorg.unicode.cldr:cldr-api0.1-SNAPSHOTindirect
Mavenxalan:serializer2.7.2indirect
Mavenxalan:xalan2.7.2indirect
Mavenxerces:xercesImpl2.12.0indirect
Mavenxml-apis:xml-apis1.4.01indirect
NuGetIcu4c.Win.Fw.Libindirect
PyPIgitpythonindirect
PyPIjiraindirect
RubyGemsgithub-pagesindirect
RubyGemsjekyll-feedindirect
RubyGemsjust-the-docsindirect
RubyGemsminimaindirect
RubyGemstzinfoindirect
RubyGemstzinfo-dataindirect
RubyGemswdmindirect
Dependency advisories 3

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 14 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 3 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 11 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
xalan:xalan2.7.2indirecthigh12.7.3
com.google.guava:guava30.0-jreindirectmoderate232.0.0-android
xerces:xercesImpl2.12.0indirectmoderate22.12.2

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 statistics.