Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-14 15:39 UTC

sul-dlss / datacite-ruby

A Ruby client library for the DataCite REST API

RubyApache-2.0★ 0 stars⑂ 2 forkssince Jul 2021View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined
#infrastructure#gem

sul-dlss/datacite-ruby holds a health index of 80 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (92/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (37/100). It was last updated today. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

80
overall / 100
Excellent

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.

80
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 68 is calibrated to 80 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Stanford University Digital LibraryOrganization
135 followers159 public repossince Mar 2010

This repository is backed by an organization — shared, accountable stewardship that can outlive any single maintainer.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
RubyGemsdatacite0.8.6-1823 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

92Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

98Exceptional
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
33.9/36Commit cadence — 49/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 203 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year203
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year49

Release discipline

84Excellent
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 3 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 34 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~138 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count3
latest_release_tagv0.8.5
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release34
mean_days_between_releases138
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?

37Weak · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

6Critical
How it's scored
0/60Stars — 0 stars
0/25Forks — 2 forks
5.6/15Watchers — 11 watchers
Inputs used
forks2
stars0
watchers11
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

57Moderate
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges3
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesbadge.fury.io, circleci.com, codecov.io
has_pull_request_templateyes

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

60Moderate
How it's scored
47.9/80Total downloads — 40,562 downloads all-time across rubygems
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesdatacite
dependents—
ecosystemsrubygems
total_downloads40,562
monthly_downloads—
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?

80Excellent · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

62Moderate
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
13.6/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 40% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 12 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 31 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled12
top_contributor_share0.397

Issue & PR responsiveness

96Exceptional
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
29.6/30PR acceptance — 269/273 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
12/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 11/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
merged_prs269
open_issues0
closed_issues3
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d7
prs_decided_30d7
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs4
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.

Ownership & stewardship

70Good
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
15.3/25Owner reach — 135 followers of sul-dlss
25/25Track record — 159 public repos, account ~16 yr old
Inputs used
followers135
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginsul-dlss
public_repos159
account_age_days6,016

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on rubygems
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 23 days ago
20/20Version history — 18 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesdatacite
ecosystemsrubygems
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish23

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

60Moderate · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

60Moderate
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .rubocop.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 11 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

60Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 2 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsinfrastructure, gem
has_wikiyes
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?

66Good · 16% of overall

Security posture

58Moderate
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 11 out of 11 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
6/7.5Code-Review — Found 11/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 31 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — no data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — no data
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 — no data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated12
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive6
scorecard_aggregate5.8
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. 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_packages84
unassessed_packages7
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 84 resolved dependencies against OSV. 7 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.

40Weak · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

22At Risk
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
22.4/40Legible commit history — 42 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.42
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

48Weak
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .rubocop.yml
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
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 — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesGemfile.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.

Code legibility for models

55Moderate
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Ruby without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/30 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRuby
largest_source_bytes34,934
source_files_sampled30
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

0GitHub stars
12contributors
203commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
3releases
2bus factor
0open issues
RubyGemspackage ecosystems

More detail

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

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.

111222212022-082024-012025-07

Each point covers 3 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.8 / 10
5.8aggregate

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 · 2026-09-14 15:39 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
10CI-Tests11 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
8Code-ReviewFound 11/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
10Contributorsproject has 31 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 11
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
RubyGemsbase64—Gemfile
RubyGemscocina-models—Gemfile
RubyGemsdebug—Gemfile
RubyGemsjson~> 2.0Gemfile
RubyGemsrake~> 13.0Gemfile
RubyGemsrspec~> 3.0Gemfile
RubyGemsrubocop~> 1.7Gemfile
RubyGemsrubocop-rake—Gemfile
RubyGemsrubocop-rspec—Gemfile
RubyGemssimplecov—Gemfile
RubyGemswebmock~> 3.13Gemfile
All dependencies 91

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 12 direct and 79 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
RubyGemsbase640.3.0direct
RubyGemscocina-models0.133.0direct
RubyGemsdebug1.11.1direct
RubyGemsjson—direct
RubyGemsjson2.21.2direct
RubyGemsrake13.4.2direct
RubyGemsrspec3.13.2direct
RubyGemsrubocop1.90.0direct
RubyGemsrubocop-rake0.7.1direct
RubyGemsrubocop-rspec3.10.2direct
RubyGemssimplecov1.2.0direct
RubyGemswebmock3.26.4direct
RubyGemsactivesupport—indirect
RubyGemsactivesupport8.1.3.1indirect
RubyGemsaddressable2.9.0indirect
RubyGemsast2.4.3indirect
RubyGemsattr_extras7.1.0indirect
RubyGemsbigdecimal4.1.2indirect
RubyGemscocina_display—indirect
RubyGemscocina_display2.12.0indirect
RubyGemsconcurrent-ruby1.3.8indirect
RubyGemsconnection_pool3.0.2indirect
RubyGemscrack1.0.1indirect
RubyGemsdeprecation1.1.0indirect
RubyGemsdiff-lcs1.6.2indirect
RubyGemsdrb2.2.3indirect
RubyGemsdry-core1.2.0indirect
RubyGemsdry-inflector1.3.1indirect
RubyGemsdry-logic1.6.0indirect
RubyGemsdry-monads—indirect
RubyGemsdry-monads1.10.0indirect
RubyGemsdry-struct1.8.1indirect
RubyGemsdry-types1.9.1indirect
RubyGemsedtf3.3.0indirect
RubyGemsequivalent-xml0.6.0indirect
RubyGemserb6.0.7indirect
RubyGemsfaraday—indirect
RubyGemsfaraday2.14.3indirect
RubyGemsfaraday-net_http3.4.4indirect
RubyGemsgeo_coord0.2.0indirect
RubyGemshana1.3.7indirect
RubyGemshashdiff1.2.1indirect
RubyGemsi18n1.15.2indirect
RubyGemsice_nine0.11.2indirect
RubyGemsio-console0.9.2indirect
RubyGemsirb1.18.0indirect
RubyGemsiso86010.13.0indirect
RubyGemsjaneway-jsonpath1.1.0indirect
RubyGemsjson_schemer—indirect
RubyGemsjson_schemer2.5.0indirect
RubyGemsjsonschema_rs0.55.0indirect
RubyGemslanguage_server-protocol3.17.0.6indirect
RubyGemslint_roller1.1.0indirect
RubyGemslogger1.7.0indirect
RubyGemsminitest6.0.6indirect
RubyGemsnet-http0.9.1indirect
RubyGemsnokogiri1.19.4indirect
RubyGemsoptimist3.2.1indirect
RubyGemsparallel2.2.0indirect
RubyGemsparser3.3.12.0indirect
RubyGemspatience_diff1.2.0indirect
RubyGemspp0.6.4indirect
RubyGemsprettyprint0.2.0indirect
RubyGemsprism1.9.0indirect
RubyGemspublic_suffix7.0.5indirect
RubyGemsracc1.8.1indirect
RubyGemsrainbow3.1.1indirect
RubyGemsrake-compiler-dock1.12.0indirect
RubyGemsrb_sys0.9.130indirect
RubyGemsrbs4.2.0indirect
RubyGemsrdoc8.0.0indirect
RubyGemsregexp_parser2.12.0indirect
RubyGemsreline0.7.0indirect
RubyGemsrexml3.4.4indirect
RubyGemsrspec-core3.13.6indirect
RubyGemsrspec-expectations3.13.5indirect
RubyGemsrspec-mocks3.13.8indirect
RubyGemsrspec-support3.13.7indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-ast1.50.0indirect
RubyGemsruby-progressbar1.13.0indirect
RubyGemssecurerandom0.4.1indirect
RubyGemssimpleidn0.3.0indirect
RubyGemssuper_diff0.19.0indirect
RubyGemsthor1.5.0indirect
RubyGemstsort0.2.0indirect
RubyGemstzinfo2.0.6indirect
RubyGemsunicode-display_width3.2.0indirect
RubyGemsunicode-emoji4.2.0indirect
RubyGemsuri1.1.1indirect
RubyGemszeitwerk—indirect
RubyGemszeitwerk2.8.3indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 84 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 7 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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with sul-dlss/datacite-ruby. Read them side by side →

90sul-dlss/cocina-modelsCocina repository data model (implemented in Ruby)Excellent83sul-dlss/dor-services-clientA Ruby client for the RESTful HTTP APIs provided by the Digital Object Registry (DOR) APIExcellent80sul-dlss/sdr-clientSDR API client (in Ruby)Excellent80sul-dlss/cocina_displayHelpers for rendering Cocina metadataExcellent78sul-dlss/lyber-coreSULAIR Robot Framework and Infrastructure ToolsGood78sul-dlss/assembly-objectfilePerforms file operations necessary for accessioning of content by the Stanford University Digital LibraryGood

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 — RubyGems.