# sofastack/sofa-boot — health index 64/100 (Moderate)

> Inspection of the public repository sofastack/sofa-boot by inspect.software. It holds a health index of 64 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. The index is a signal derived from publicly visible practice, not a warranty, a security audit, or an endorsement, and it is independent of payment.

- Repository: https://github.com/sofastack/sofa-boot
- Report page: https://inspect.software/software/sofastack/sofa-boot
- Full JSON report: https://inspect.software/api/repositories/sofastack/sofa-boot/report
- Badge: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/inspect-software/badges/main/v1/s/sofastack/sofa-boot.svg
- Inspected: 2026-07-24
- Methodology: metrics 1.13.0, report schema 0.27.0 (https://inspect.software/methodology.md)

## Category summary

| Category | Weight | Index | Band |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vitality | 22% | 39/100 | At risk |
| Community & Adoption | 18% | 85/100 | Excellent |
| Sustainability & Governance | 24% | 80/100 | Good |
| Engineering Quality | 20% | 65/100 | Moderate |
| Security | 16% | 51/100 | Moderate |
| AI Readiness | not counted | 57/100 | Moderate |

## Repository facts

| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Description | SOFABoot is a framework that enhances Spring Boot and fully compatible with it, provides readiness check, class isolation, etc. |
| Homepage | https://www.sofastack.tech/sofa-boot/docs/Home |
| Primary language | Java |
| License | Apache-2.0 |
| Stars | 5,073 |
| Forks | 1,262 |
| Created | 2018-04-02 |
| Last push | 2026-04-24 |
| Latest release | v4.6.0 |
| Commits (last year) | 5 |
| Bus factor | 3 |
| Topics | sofa-boot, sofa-boot-starter, sofastack |

## Published packages

| Registry | Package | Latest | Monthly downloads |
|---|---|---|---|
| maven | com.alipay.sofa:sofa-boot | 4.6.0 | — |
| maven | com.alipay.sofa:sofa-boot-actuator | 4.6.0 | — |
| maven | com.alipay.sofa:sofa-boot-jacoco-report | 3.25.0 | — |
| maven | com.alipay.sofa:sofa-boot-autoconfigure | 4.6.0 | — |
| maven | com.alipay.sofa:sofa-boot-actuator-autoconfigure | 4.6.0 | — |

## Vitality — 39/100 (At risk)

Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping? Weight: 22% of the overall index.

### Development activity — 19/100 (Critical)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Push recency | partial | 9.9 / 36 | last push 91 days ago |
| Commit cadence | partial | 2.1 / 36 | 3/52 weeks with commits |
| Commit volume | partial | 7 / 18 | 5 commits in the last year |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained | not met | 0 / 10 | 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0 |

### Release discipline — 70/100 (Good)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ships releases | met | 27 / 27 | 83 releases published |
| Release recency | partial | 16.2 / 36 | latest release 239 days ago |
| Release cadence | partial | 19.8 / 27 | a release every ~75 days |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases | excluded | 0 / 10 | no releases found |

### Abandonment — 100/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Project is still maintained | met | 100 / 100 | last human commit 91 days ago |

## Community & Adoption — 85/100 (Excellent)

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors? Weight: 18% of the overall index.

### Popularity & adoption — 99/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stars | met | 60 / 60 | 5,073 stars |
| Forks | met | 25 / 25 | 1,262 forks |
| Watchers | partial | 13.8 / 15 | 309 watchers |

### Community health — 70/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | met | 22.5 / 22.5 | — |
| License | met | 22.5 / 22.5 | recognized license (Apache-2.0) |
| CONTRIBUTING guide | met | 18 / 18 | — |
| Code of conduct | not met | 0 / 13.5 | — |
| Issue template | not met | 0 / 7.2 | — |
| PR template | not met | 0 / 6.3 | — |

## Sustainability & Governance — 80/100 (Good)

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep? Weight: 24% of the overall index.

### Maintainer resilience (bus factor) — 76/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bus factor | partial | 36 / 54 | 3 contributor(s) cover half of all commits |
| Commit distribution | partial | 17 / 22.5 | top contributor authored 24% of commits |
| Contributor breadth | met | 13.5 / 13.5 | 40 contributors |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors | met | 10 / 10 | project has 17 contributing companies or organizations |

### Issue & PR responsiveness — 80/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Issue resolution | partial | 44.6 / 46.8 | 95% of issues closed |
| PR acceptance | partial | 33.7 / 38.2 | 816/925 decided PRs merged |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review | partial | 1.5 / 15 | Found 4/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1 |

### Ownership & stewardship — 76/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership backing | met | 30 / 30 | organization-owned |
| Verified domain | not met | 0 / 20 | — |
| Owner reach | partial | 21.4 / 25 | 932 followers of sofastack |
| Track record | partial | 24.2 / 25 | 47 public repos, account ~8 yr old |

### Package maintenance — 91/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Published & resolvable | met | 25 / 25 | 5 package(s) on maven |
| Publish recency | partial | 26 / 35 | latest publish 242 days ago |
| Version history | met | 20 / 20 | 56 published versions |
| Not deprecated | met | 20 / 20 | active, not deprecated or yanked |

## Engineering Quality — 65/100 (Moderate)

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place? Weight: 20% of the overall index.

### Engineering practices — 58/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| CI workflows | met | 24 / 24 | 3 workflow(s) |
| Tests present | met | 24 / 24 | — |
| Linter config | not met | 0 / 16 | — |
| Pre-commit hooks | not met | 0 / 9.6 | — |
| .editorconfig | not met | 0 / 6.4 | — |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests | partial | 10 / 20 | 16 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5 |

### Documentation — 75/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | met | 30 / 30 | — |
| Documentation directory | not met | 0 / 25 | — |
| Documentation / homepage site | met | 15 / 15 | https://www.sofastack.tech/sofa-boot/docs/Home |
| Repository description | met | 10 / 10 | — |
| Topics | met | 10 / 10 | 3 topics |
| Wiki | met | 10 / 10 | — |

## Security — 51/100 (Moderate)

Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, with no malicious dependency and no unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure? Weight: 16% of the overall index.

### Security posture — 47/100 (At risk)

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

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Binary-Artifacts | partial | 6 / 7.5 | binaries present in source code |
| Branch-Protection | partial | 5.2 / 7.5 | branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches |
| CI-Tests | partial | 1.2 / 2.5 | 16 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5 |
| CII-Best-Practices | not met | 0 / 2.5 | no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected |
| Code-Review | partial | 0.8 / 7.5 | Found 4/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1 |
| Contributors | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | project has 17 contributing companies or organizations |
| Dangerous-Workflow | met | 10 / 10 | no dangerous workflow patterns detected |
| Dependency-Update-Tool | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | update tool detected |
| Fuzzing | not met | 0 / 5 | project is not fuzzed |
| License | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | license file detected |
| Maintained | not met | 0 / 7.5 | 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0 |
| Packaging | met | 5 / 5 | packaging workflow detected |
| Pinned-Dependencies | not met | 0 / 5 | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0 |
| SAST | not met | 0 / 5 | SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0 |
| Security-Policy | met | 5 / 5 | security policy file detected |
| Signed-Releases | excluded | 0 / 7.5 | no releases found |
| Token-Permissions | not met | 0 / 7.5 | detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions |
| Vulnerabilities | not met | 0 / 7.5 | 12 existing vulnerabilities detected |

### Dependency advisories — 65/100 (Moderate)

Matched the maven:com.alipay.sofa:sofa-boot@4.6.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 18 packages. Reachability is not analyzed.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct dependencies free of known advisories | partial | 15.4 / 35 | 1 affected: org.springframework.boot:spring-boot 3.5.6 (high 7.0) |
| Indirect dependencies free of known advisories | partial | 14 / 25 | 1 affected: com.google.guava:guava 31.1-jre (moderate 5.5) |
| No advisories left outstanding | partial | 35.2 / 40 | 1 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 1947 days ago |

### Malicious dependencies — 100/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| No dependency reported as a malicious package | met | 100 / 100 | no dependency is reported as a malicious package |

### High-Risk Jurisdiction Exposure — 100/100 (Excellent)

Only high-confidence self-published location evidence affects this multiplier. Ambiguous matches are review-only; country evidence is not proof of nationality, citizenship, legal registration, malicious intent, or sanctions status.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Policy exposure multiplier | met | 100 / 100 | no confirmed policy-scope location match |

## AI Readiness — 57/100 (Moderate)

How well is the repo equipped to be developed and maintained with AI coding agents? An independent, experimental badge — weight 0.0, so it is surfaced on its own and does not affect the overall health score.

### Agent context & guidance — 40/100 (At risk)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agent instructions | not met | 0 / 45 | no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules |
| Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) | not met | 0 / 15 | — |
| Legible commit history | met | 40 / 40 | 98 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body) |

### Verify loop (build / test / typecheck) — 46/100 (At risk)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| One-command bootstrap | partial | 12.6 / 18 | pom.xml, sofa-boot-project/pom.xml, sofa-boot-project/sofa-boot-actuator-autoconfigure/pom.xml (toolchain convention, no task runner) |
| Automated tests | met | 22 / 22 | — |
| Lint / format config | not met | 0 / 11 | — |
| Static type checking | met | 11 / 11 | Java (statically typed) |
| Reproducible environment | not met | 0 / 10 | — |
| Demonstrated agent practice | not met | 0 / 10 | no agent-authored commits among the last 100 |
| Automated maintenance | not met | 0 / 8 | no automated dependency updates observed |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies | not met | 0 / 10 | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0 |

### Code legibility for models — 100/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type-checkable code | met | 45 / 45 | Java (statically typed) |
| Manageable file sizes | met | 55 / 55 | 0/866 source files over 60KB |

### Machine-readable interfaces — 80/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) | met | 40 / 40 | sofa-boot-tests/sofa-boot-smoke-tests/sofa-boot-smoke-tests-rpc/src/main/proto/helloworld.proto |
| MCP server | not met | 0 / 20 | — |
| Runnable examples | met | 40 / 40 | example, sample |

## Collection warnings

- Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token

## What this report is

inspect.software measures public repositories against a single published, versioned methodology and reports the result as a 1–100 health index. Findings are signals derived from what is visible in public repository data — they are not a security audit, a warranty, or an endorsement, and no result depends on payment.

- Methodology, formulas and weights: https://inspect.software/methodology.md
- What a result does and does not claim: https://inspect.software/wiki/signals-not-warranties.md
- Rating bands: https://inspect.software/wiki/scoring-bands.md
- Corrections: https://inspect.software/contact.md
- Index of all documents: https://inspect.software/llms.txt