Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-17 03:40 UTC

simonw / datasette

An open source multi-tool for exploring and publishing data

Python · JavaScriptApache-2.0★ 11,470 stars⑂ 903 forkssince Oct 2017View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolPluginhow this is determined

simonw/datasette holds a health index of 93 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Vitality (95/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (57/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

93
overall / 100
Exceptional

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.

93
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 79 is calibrated to 93 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Simon WillisonPersonal account
16,925 followers988 public repossince May 2008Datasette

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
PyPIdatasette0.65.5172,8431820 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

95Exceptional · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
28.4/36Commit cadence — 41/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 797 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 22 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year797
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year41

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~10.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tag1.0a40
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases10.2
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?

90Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
60/60Stars — 11,470 stars
24.6/25Forks — 903 forks
11.3/15Watchers — 107 watchers
Inputs used
forks903
stars11,470
watchers107
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
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
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges8
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, readthedocs.org, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
69.8/80Monthly downloads — 172,843 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesdatasette
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads172,843
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?

64Moderate · 23% of overall
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 — 95 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 22 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled95
top_contributor_share0.927
How it's scored
31.1/42Issue resolution — 74% of issues closed
22.8/30PR acceptance — 463/610 decided PRs merged
4.6/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 5/14 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
3/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 7/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
merged_prs463
open_issues533
closed_issues1,528
prs_merged_7d17
prs_decided_7d25
prs_merged_30d21
prs_decided_30d34
issue_closed_ratio0.741
closed_unmerged_prs147
first_time_authors_30d8
first_time_prs_merged_30d5
first_time_prs_decided_30d14
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
25/25Owner reach — 16,925 followers of simonw
25/25Track record — 988 public repos, account ~18 yr old
Inputs used
followers16,925
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginsimonw
public_repos988
account_age_days6,706
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 0 days ago
20/20Version history — 182 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesdatasette
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

87Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 12 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — ruff.toml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
14/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 9 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://datasette.io
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 11 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicssqlite, python, datasets, json, docker, datasette, automatic-api, asgi, csv, datasette-io, sql
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://datasette.io
docs_sitehttps://datasette.io
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

64Moderate · 16% of overall
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
1.8/2.5CI-Tests — 9 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1.5/7.5Code-Review — Found 7/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 22 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 22 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
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
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
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate5.5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages52
unassessed_packages26
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 52 resolved dependencies against OSV. 26 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.

57Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
24.5/40Legible commit history — 46 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.46
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Justfile, docs/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — ruff.toml
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
2/10Demonstrated agent practice — 1 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
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
lockfilespackage-lock.json
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesJustfile, docs/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.01
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
51.7/55Manageable file sizes — 11/185 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes367,207
source_files_sampled185
oversized_source_files11
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 — demos
Inputs used
example_dirsdemos
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

11,470GitHub stars
95contributors
797commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
533open issues
npm, PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • deps.dev does not index pypi:datasette@0.65.5; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 903 ⇿
0Stars
903Forks
96Releases

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.

02004006008001,000896172017-112022-042026-09
Major 0Minor 0Patch 29

Each point covers 9 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.5 / 10
5.5aggregate

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 · 2026-09-17 03:39 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
7CI-Tests9 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2Code-ReviewFound 7/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
10Contributorsproject has 22 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 22 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
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
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 22
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm@codemirror/lang-sql^6.3.3package.json
npm@rollup/plugin-node-resolve^15.0.1package.json
npm@rollup/plugin-terser^0.1.0package.json
npmcodemirror^6.0.1package.json
npmrollup^3.30.0package.json
PyPIasgiref>=3.2.10pyproject.toml
PyPIclick>=7.1.1pyproject.toml
PyPIclick-default-group>=1.2.3pyproject.toml
PyPIJinja2>=2.10.3pyproject.toml
PyPIhupper>=1.9pyproject.toml
PyPIhttpx2>=2.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpluggy>=1.0pyproject.toml
PyPIuvicorn>=0.29pyproject.toml
PyPIaiofiles>=0.4pyproject.toml
PyPIPyYAML>=5.3pyproject.toml
PyPImergedeep>=1.1.1pyproject.toml
PyPIitsdangerous>=1.1pyproject.toml
PyPIsqlite-utils>=4.0pyproject.toml
PyPIasyncinject>=0.7pyproject.toml
PyPIsetuptools—pyproject.toml
PyPIpip—pyproject.toml
PyPIpydantic>=2pyproject.toml
All dependencies 78

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 20 direct and 58 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@codemirror/lang-sql6.3.3direct
npm@rollup/plugin-node-resolve15.0.1direct
npm@rollup/plugin-terser0.1.0direct
npmcodemirror6.0.1direct
npmrollup3.30.0direct
PyPIaiofiles—direct
PyPIasgiref—direct
PyPIasyncinject—direct
PyPIclick—direct
PyPIclick-default-group—direct
PyPIhttpx2—direct
PyPIhupper—direct
PyPIitsdangerous—direct
PyPIjinja2—direct
PyPImergedeep—direct
PyPIpluggy—direct
PyPIpydantic—direct
PyPIpyyaml—direct
PyPIsqlite-utils—direct
PyPIuvicorn—direct
npm@codemirror/autocomplete6.3.2indirect
npm@codemirror/commands6.1.2indirect
npm@codemirror/language6.3.1indirect
npm@codemirror/lint6.1.0indirect
npm@codemirror/search6.2.3indirect
npm@codemirror/state6.1.4indirect
npm@codemirror/view6.5.1indirect
npm@jridgewell/gen-mapping0.3.2indirect
npm@jridgewell/resolve-uri3.1.0indirect
npm@jridgewell/set-array1.1.2indirect
npm@jridgewell/source-map0.3.2indirect
npm@jridgewell/sourcemap-codec1.4.14indirect
npm@jridgewell/trace-mapping0.3.17indirect
npm@lezer/common1.0.1indirect
npm@lezer/highlight1.1.2indirect
npm@lezer/lr1.2.4indirect
npm@rollup/pluginutils5.0.2indirect
npm@types/estree1.0.0indirect
npm@types/resolve1.20.2indirect
npmacorn8.8.1indirect
npmbuffer-from1.1.2indirect
npmbuiltin-modules3.3.0indirect
npmcommander2.20.3indirect
npmcrelt1.0.5indirect
npmdeepmerge4.2.2indirect
npmestree-walker2.0.2indirect
npmfsevents2.3.2indirect
npmfunction-bind1.1.1indirect
npmhas1.0.3indirect
npmis-builtin-module3.2.0indirect
npmis-core-module2.11.0indirect
npmis-module1.0.0indirect
npmpath-parse1.0.7indirect
npmpicomatch2.3.2indirect
npmprettier3.6.2indirect
npmresolve1.22.1indirect
npmsource-map0.6.1indirect
npmsource-map-support0.5.21indirect
npmstyle-mod4.0.0indirect
npmsupports-preserve-symlinks-flag1.0.0indirect
npmterser5.15.1indirect
npmw3c-keyname2.2.6indirect
PyPIbeautifulsoup4—indirect
PyPIblack26.3.1indirect
PyPIblacken-docs1.20.0indirect
PyPIcodespell—indirect
PyPIcogapp—indirect
PyPIfuro2025.9.25indirect
PyPImultipart-form-data-conformance0.1a0indirect
PyPIpsutil—indirect
PyPIpytest—indirect
PyPIpytest-asyncio—indirect
PyPIpytest-playwright—indirect
PyPIpytest-timeout—indirect
PyPIpytest-xdist—indirect
PyPIruff—indirect
PyPIsphinx7.4.7indirect
PyPItrustme—indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 52 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 26 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

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 — PyPI.