Public record
Software health reportschema 0.11.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-16 13:10 UTC

sul-dlss / dor-services-client

A Ruby client for the RESTful HTTP APIs provided by the Digital Object Registry (DOR) API

RubyApache-2.0★ 0 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Dec 2018View on GitHub ↗

sul-dlss/dor-services-client holds a health index of 81 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (96/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (38/100). It was last updated today. 3 contributors account for most of its recent work.

81
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.

81
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 69 is calibrated to 81 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

127 followers161 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
RubyGemsdor-services-client15.64.0-2810 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

96Exceptional · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
35.3/36Commit cadence51/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume217 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year217
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year51
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases62 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 49 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~87.7 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count62
latest_release_tagv15.43.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release49
mean_days_between_releases87.7
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?

41Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars0 stars
0/25Forks0 forks
6.2/15Watchers14 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars0
watchers14
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized 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_badges
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
58.8/80Total downloads459,088 downloads all-time across rubygems
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesdor-services-client
dependents
ecosystemsrubygems
total_downloads459,088
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?

87Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
36/54Bus factor3 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
17.8/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 21% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth11 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 31 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor3
contributors_sampled11
top_contributor_share0.209
How it's scored
41.4/42Issue resolution99% of issues closed
29.1/30PR acceptance549/566 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
6/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 9/21 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
merged_prs549
open_issues1
closed_issues68
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.986
closed_unmerged_prs17
first_time_authors_30d
first_time_prs_merged_30d
first_time_prs_decided_30d
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
15.1/25Owner reach127 followers of sul-dlss
25/25Track record161 public repos, account ~16 yr old
Inputs used
followers127
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginsul-dlss
public_repos161
account_age_days5,956
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on rubygems
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history281 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesdor-services-client
ecosystemsrubygems
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

60Moderate · 19% of overall
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-Tests9 out of 9 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
10/10Topics2 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?

53Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests9 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3/7.5Code-ReviewFound 9/21 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 31 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesno data
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsno data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated12
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive6
scorecard_aggregate5.3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. 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.

38Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config.rubocop.yml
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
0/8Automated maintenanceno data
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesno data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesGemfile.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance, OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codeRuby without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/58 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRuby
largest_source_bytes38,065
source_files_sampled58
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

0GitHub stars
11contributors
217commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
62releases
3bus factor
1open issues
RubyGemspackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.3 / 10
5.3aggregate

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 · 2026-07-16 13:10 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-Tests9 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
4Code-ReviewFound 9/21 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
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 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
RubyGemsactivesupportGemfile
All dependencies 88

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 2 direct and 86 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
RubyGemsactivesupportdirect
RubyGemsactivesupport8.1.3direct
RubyGemsaddressable2.9.0indirect
RubyGemsast2.4.3indirect
RubyGemsattr_extras7.1.0indirect
RubyGemsbase640.3.0indirect
RubyGemsbigdecimal4.1.2indirect
RubyGemsbundlerindirect
RubyGemsbyebugindirect
RubyGemsbyebug13.0.0indirect
RubyGemscocina-modelsindirect
RubyGemscocina-models0.129.0indirect
RubyGemscocina_display2.8.0indirect
RubyGemsconcurrent-ruby1.3.7indirect
RubyGemsconnection_pool3.0.2indirect
RubyGemscrack1.0.1indirect
RubyGemsdeprecationindirect
RubyGemsdeprecation1.1.0indirect
RubyGemsdiff-lcs1.6.2indirect
RubyGemsdrb2.2.3indirect
RubyGemsdry-core1.2.0indirect
RubyGemsdry-inflector1.3.1indirect
RubyGemsdry-logic1.6.0indirect
RubyGemsdry-struct1.8.1indirect
RubyGemsdry-types1.9.1indirect
RubyGemsedtf3.3.0indirect
RubyGemsequivalent-xml0.6.0indirect
RubyGemsfaradayindirect
RubyGemsfaraday2.14.3indirect
RubyGemsfaraday-net_http3.4.4indirect
RubyGemsfaraday-retryindirect
RubyGemsfaraday-retry2.4.0indirect
RubyGemsgeo_coord0.2.0indirect
RubyGemshashdiff1.2.1indirect
RubyGemshashieindirect
RubyGemshashie5.1.0indirect
RubyGemsi18n1.15.2indirect
RubyGemsice_nine0.11.2indirect
RubyGemsio-console0.8.2indirect
RubyGemsiso86010.13.0indirect
RubyGemsjaneway-jsonpath1.0.0indirect
RubyGemsjson2.21.1indirect
RubyGemsjsonschema_rs0.47.0indirect
RubyGemslanguage_server-protocol3.17.0.6indirect
RubyGemslint_roller1.1.0indirect
RubyGemslogger1.7.0indirect
RubyGemsminitest6.0.6indirect
RubyGemsnet-http0.9.1indirect
RubyGemsnokogiriindirect
RubyGemsnokogiri1.19.4indirect
RubyGemsoptimist3.2.1indirect
RubyGemsparallel2.1.0indirect
RubyGemsparser3.3.11.1indirect
RubyGemspatience_diff1.2.0indirect
RubyGemsprism1.9.0indirect
RubyGemspublic_suffix7.0.5indirect
RubyGemsracc1.8.1indirect
RubyGemsrainbow3.1.1indirect
RubyGemsrakeindirect
RubyGemsrake13.4.2indirect
RubyGemsregexp_parser2.12.0indirect
RubyGemsreline0.6.3indirect
RubyGemsrexml3.4.4indirect
RubyGemsrspecindirect
RubyGemsrspec3.13.2indirect
RubyGemsrspec-core3.13.6indirect
RubyGemsrspec-expectations3.13.5indirect
RubyGemsrspec-mocks3.13.8indirect
RubyGemsrspec-support3.13.7indirect
RubyGemsrubocopindirect
RubyGemsrubocop1.88.2indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-ast1.50.0indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-rspecindirect
RubyGemsrubocop-rspec3.10.2indirect
RubyGemsruby-progressbar1.13.0indirect
RubyGemssecurerandom0.4.1indirect
RubyGemssimplecovindirect
RubyGemssimplecov1.0.0indirect
RubyGemssuper_diff0.19.0indirect
RubyGemsthor1.5.0indirect
RubyGemstzinfo2.0.6indirect
RubyGemsunicode-display_width3.2.0indirect
RubyGemsunicode-emoji4.2.0indirect
RubyGemsuri1.1.1indirect
RubyGemswebmockindirect
RubyGemswebmock3.26.2indirect
RubyGemszeitwerkindirect
RubyGemszeitwerk2.8.2indirect
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 v0.11.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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