Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-23 03:42 UTC

test-kitchen / kitchen-ec2

A Test Kitchen Driver for Amazon EC2

RubyCustom license★ 220 stars⑂ 201 forkssince Feb 2013View on GitHub ↗

test-kitchen/kitchen-ec2 holds a health index of 88 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (84/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (53/100). It was last updated today. 3 contributors account for most of its recent work.

88
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.

88
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 74 is calibrated to 88 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Test KitchenOrganization
30 followers44 public repossince Nov 2013

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
RubyGemskitchen-ec23.22.4-710 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

74Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
5.5/36Commit cadence8/52 weeks with commits
12.6/18Commit volume24 commits in the last year
8/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained9 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
commits_last_year24
human_commit_share0.87
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year8
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases11 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 0 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~110.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count11
latest_release_tagv3.22.4
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases110.9
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?

77Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
38/60Stars220 stars
19.2/25Forks201 forks
7.5/15Watchers23 watchers
Inputs used
forks201
stars220
watchers23
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

86Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
16.9/22.5Licenselicense file present, not a recognized license
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges2
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesbadge.fury.io, github.com
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
67.1/80Total downloads2,875,099 downloads all-time across rubygems
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packageskitchen-ec2
dependents
ecosystemsrubygems
total_downloads2,875,099
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?

78Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
36/54Bus factor3 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
15.9/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 29% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth92 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 35 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor3
contributors_sampled92
top_contributor_share0.292
How it's scored
37.5/42Issue resolution89% of issues closed
22.5/30PR acceptance289/385 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
9/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 13/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
merged_prs289
open_issues30
closed_issues252
prs_merged_7d6
prs_decided_7d6
prs_merged_30d6
prs_decided_30d6
issue_closed_ratio0.894
closed_unmerged_prs96
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
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domain
10.7/25Owner reach30 followers of test-kitchen
24/25Track record44 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers30
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_logintest-kitchen
public_repos44
account_age_days4,666

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on rubygems
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history71 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageskitchen-ec2
ecosystemsrubygems
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

84Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.rubocop.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
16/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests24 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://www.rubydoc.info/gems/kitchen-ec2/3.22.4
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics8 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsaws, test-kitchen, ec2, ruby, hacktoberfest, managed-by-terraform, ruby-gem, testing
has_wikino
homepage
docs_sitehttps://www.rubydoc.info/gems/kitchen-ec2/3.22.4
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

58Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
2/2.5CI-Tests24 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
4.5/7.5Code-ReviewFound 13/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 35 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.2/2.5Licenselicense file detected
6/7.5Maintained9 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 8
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
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-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate5.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, 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.

53Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)llms.txt served by the project website (https://docs.aws.amazon.com/llms.txt)
38.6/40Legible commit history63 of 87 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://docs.aws.amazon.com/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.724
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config.rubocop.yml
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
10/10Demonstrated agent practice7 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance13 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency 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_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0.07
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.13
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codeRuby without a type-check config
53.8/55Manageable file sizes1/47 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRuby
largest_source_bytes75,491
source_files_sampled47
oversized_source_files1

Key facts

220GitHub stars
92contributors
24commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
11releases
3bus factor
30open issues
RubyGemspackage 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 ★ / 201 ⇿
0Stars
201Forks
9Releases

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.

0408012016020019652013-032019-092026-04
Major 0Minor 5Patch 4

Each point covers 13 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.9 / 10
5.9aggregate

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 · 2026-08-23 03:42 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
8CI-Tests24 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6Code-ReviewFound 13/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
10Contributorsproject has 35 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
9Licenselicense file detected
8Maintained9 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 8
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
Direct dependencies 2
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
RubyGemspryGemfile
RubyGemscookstyle~> 8.1Gemfile
All dependencies 11

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 2 direct and 9 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
RubyGemscookstyledirect
RubyGemsprydirect
RubyGemsaws-sdk-ec2indirect
RubyGemsaws-sdk-ec2instanceconnectindirect
RubyGemsaws-sdk-ssmindirect
RubyGemsrakeindirect
RubyGemsretryableindirect
RubyGemsrspecindirect
RubyGemssshkeyindirect
RubyGemstest-kitchenindirect
RubyGemsyardindirect
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 statisticsRubyGems.