Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-17 21:25 UTC

simov / slugify

Slugifies a string

JavaScriptMIT★ 1,743 stars⑂ 142 forkssince Feb 2013View on GitHub ↗

simov/slugify holds a health index of 53 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (72/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (27/100). It was last updated 80 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

53
overall / 100
Moderate

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.

53
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 52 is calibrated to 53 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

simoPersonal account
500 followers131 public repossince Apr 2012Outofindex

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 publishTags
npmslugify1.6.964,558,52844168 days agoslugifyslugurlurlify

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

37Weak · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recency — last push 80 days ago
2.1/36Commit cadence — 3/52 weeks with commits
9/18Commit volume — 9 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 1 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year9
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push80
active_weeks_last_year3
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases — 41 version tags (no GitHub releases)
16.2/36Release recency — latest release 187 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~196.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count41
latest_release_tagv1.6.8
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release187
mean_days_between_releases196.3
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
How it's scored
52.6/60Stars — 1,743 stars
17.9/25Forks — 142 forks
4.3/15Watchers — 7 watchers
Inputs used
forks142
stars1,743
watchers7
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code 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_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads — 64,558,528 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesslugify
dependents—
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads64,558,528
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
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
7.3/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 67% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 38 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 5 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled38
top_contributor_share0.674
How it's scored
32.8/42Issue resolution — 78% of issues closed
18/30PR acceptance — 54/90 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
7.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 12/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
merged_prs54
open_issues23
closed_issues82
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.781
closed_unmerged_prs36
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
19.4/25Owner reach — 500 followers of simov
25/25Track record — 131 public repos, account ~14 yr old
Inputs used
followers500
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginsimov
public_repos131
account_age_days5,252
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 npm
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 168 days ago
20/20Version history — 44 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesslugify
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish168

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

50Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
2/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 2 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
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?

37Weak · 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
0.2/2.5CI-Tests — 2 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 1
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3.8/7.5Code-Review — Found 12/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 5 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
0/7.5Maintained — 1 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
0/5Packaging — no data
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_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate3.7
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, 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.

27At Risk · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
18.7/40Legible commit history — 35 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.35
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
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_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — JavaScript without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/5 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes10,895
source_files_sampled5
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

1,743GitHub stars
38contributors
9commits, last 12 months
80days since last push
41releases
1bus factor
23open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 142 ⇿
0Stars
142Forks
41Releases

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.

025507510012515014032014-062020-072026-07
Major 0Minor 6Patch 35

Each point covers 12 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.7 / 10
3.7aggregate

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 · 2026-09-17 21:24 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
1CI-Tests2 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 1
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
5Code-ReviewFound 12/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
10Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained1 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
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
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 4

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 4 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npmcoveralls^3.1.0indirect
npmgithub-changes^2.0.3indirect
npmmocha^7.2.0indirect
npmnyc^15.1.0indirect
Dependency advisories not assessed

Advisory matching could not run for this report: No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

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 — npm.