Public record
Software health reportschema 0.29.0 · metrics 2.5.0 · 2026-08-02 23:34 UTC

sudorandom / protojsonx

Fast and conformant protojson library for Go

GoMIT★ 3 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Jun 2026View on GitHub ↗

sudorandom/protojsonx holds a health index of 57 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (75/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (26/100). It was last updated 12 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

57
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.

57
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 55 is calibrated to 57 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Kevin McDonaldPersonal account
146 followers51 public repossince Jun 2010@sybogames

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
Gogithub.com/sudorandom/protojsonxv0.0.8-812 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

64Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recency — last push 12 days ago
3.5/36Commit cadence — 5/52 weeks with commits
15.1/18Commit volume — 47 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — project was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
Inputs used
commits_last_year47
human_commit_share0.979
days_since_last_push12
active_weeks_last_year5
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 7 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 12 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~5.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count7
latest_release_tagv0.0.8
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release12
mean_days_between_releases5.1

Community & Adoption

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?

26At Risk · 17% of overall
How it's scored
4.9/60Stars — 3 stars
0/25Forks — 0 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars3
watchers0
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_badges3
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, pkg.go.dev, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

58Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 1 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
30/30PR acceptance — 3/3 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 3/3 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/25 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs3
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d3
prs_decided_30d3
issue_closed_ratio
closed_unmerged_prs0
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d3
first_time_prs_decided_30d3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
15.6/25Owner reach — 146 followers of sudorandom
24.5/25Track record — 51 public repos, account ~16 yr old
Inputs used
followers146
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginsudorandom
public_repos51
account_age_days5,887
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 go
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 12 days ago
20/20Version history — 8 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesgithub.com/sudorandom/protojsonx
ecosystemsgo
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish12

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

75Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 3 out of 3 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

85Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 5 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsjson, protobuf, protoc, protoc-plugin, protocol-buffers
has_wikiyes
homepage
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

44Weak · 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
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 3 out of 3 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/25 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0.8/2.5Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
5/5Fuzzing — project is fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
0/7.5Maintained — project was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
5/5SAST — SAST tool is run on all commits
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6/7.5Vulnerabilities — 2 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate3.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): packaging. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
9.5/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: google.golang.org/grpc v1.81.1 (critical 9.1)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
40/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory has been public longer than 90 days
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories3
affected_packages2
assessed_packages8
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitycritical 1, unknown 1
direct_affected_packages1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 8 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.

58Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 45 of 46 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
legible_history_share0.978
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — .mise.toml, justfile
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — Go (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
4.3/10Demonstrated agent practice — 1 of the last 47 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
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
lockfilesgo.sum
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files.mise.toml, justfile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0.021
toolchain_manifestsgo.mod, protojsonxconnect/go.mod, protojsonxgrpc/go.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Go (statically typed)
45.8/55Manageable file sizes — 5/30 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageGo
largest_source_bytes256,579
source_files_sampled30
oversized_source_files5
How it's scored
40/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — proto/google/protobuf/test_messages_proto3.proto, proto/test_shapes.proto, proto/user.proto
0/20MCP server
0/40Runnable examples
Inputs used
example_dirs
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_filesproto/google/protobuf/test_messages_proto3.proto, proto/test_shapes.proto, proto/user.proto

Key facts

3GitHub stars
1contributors
47commits, last 12 months
12days since last push
7releases
1bus factor
0open issues
Gopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.9 / 10
3.9aggregate

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 · 2026-08-02 23:33 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests3 out of 3 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 0/25 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
10Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
8Vulnerabilities2 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 8
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Gogoogle.golang.org/protobufv1.36.11go.mod
Gogithub.com/stretchr/testifyv1.11.1go.mod
Goconnectrpc.com/connectv1.16.2protojsonxconnect/go.mod
Gogithub.com/sudorandom/protojsonxv0.0.0protojsonxconnect/go.mod
Gogoogle.golang.org/protobufv1.36.11protojsonxconnect/go.mod
Gogithub.com/sudorandom/protojsonxv0.0.0protojsonxgrpc/go.mod
Gogoogle.golang.org/grpcv1.81.1protojsonxgrpc/go.mod
Gogoogle.golang.org/protobufv1.36.11protojsonxgrpc/go.mod
All dependencies 8

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

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Goconnectrpc.com/connectv1.16.2direct
Gogithub.com/stretchr/testifyv1.11.1direct
Gogoogle.golang.org/grpcv1.81.1direct
Gogoogle.golang.org/protobufv1.36.11direct
Gogithub.com/davecgh/go-spewv1.1.1indirect
Gogithub.com/pmezard/go-difflibv1.0.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/sysv0.42.0indirect
Gogopkg.in/yaml.v3v3.0.1indirect
Dependency advisories 2

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 8 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 2 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
google.golang.org/grpcv1.81.1directcritical21.82.1
golang.org/x/sysv0.42.0indirectunknown10.44.0

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

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 v2.5.0, schema v0.29.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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