Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-17 17:36 UTC

theOehrly / Fast-F1

FastF1 is a python package for accessing and analyzing Formula 1 results, schedules, timing data and telemetry

PythonMIT★ 5,373 stars⑂ 486 forkssince Apr 2020View on GitHub ↗

theOehrly/Fast-F1 holds a health index of 89 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (94/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (54/100). It was last updated 20 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

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.

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)

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 75 is calibrated to 89 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Philipp SchaeferPersonal account

312 followers21 public repossince Nov 2016

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Package ecosystems

Registry	Package	Version	Downloads / mo	Versions	Last publish
PyPI	fastf1	3.8.3	1,014,207	77	140 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

77Good · 21% of overall

Development activity

74Good

How it's scored

28.8/36	Push recency — last push 20 days ago
18/36	Commit cadence — 26/52 weeks with commits
17/18	Commit volume — 78 commits in the last year
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 26 commit(s) and 9 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

commits_last_year	78
human_commit_share	1
days_since_last_push	20
active_weeks_last_year	26

Release discipline

82Excellent

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 80 releases published
27/36	Release recency — latest release 140 days ago
19.8/27	Release cadence — a release every ~45.5 days
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data

Inputs used

releases_count	80
latest_release_tag	v3.8.3
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	140
mean_days_between_releases	45.5

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?

94Exceptional · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

92Excellent

How it's scored

60/60	Stars — 5,373 stars
22.4/25	Forks — 486 forks
9.6/15	Watchers — 55 watchers

Inputs used

forks	486
stars	5,373
watchers	55
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

92Excellent

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
22.5/22.5	License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18	CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5	Code of conduct
0/7.2	Issue template
6.3/6.3	PR template

Inputs used

has_readme	yes
has_license	yes
readme_badges	0
has_contributing	yes
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	yes
readme_badge_services	—
has_pull_request_template	yes

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

100Exceptional

How it's scored

80/80	Monthly downloads — 1,014,207 downloads/month across pypi
0/20	Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem

Inputs used

packages	fastf1
dependents	—
ecosystems	pypi
total_downloads	—
monthly_downloads	1,014,207
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?

66Good · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

37Weak

How it's scored

9/54	Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
4.8/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 79% of commits
13.5/13.5	Contributor breadth — 46 contributors
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 7 contributing companies or organizations

Inputs used

bus_factor	1
contributors_sampled	46
top_contributor_share	0.788

Issue & PR responsiveness

79Good

How it's scored

38.5/42	Issue resolution — 92% of issues closed
22.8/30	PR acceptance — 180/237 decided PRs merged
0/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
7.5/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 9/18 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5

Inputs used

merged_prs	180
open_issues	32
closed_issues	355
prs_merged_7d	0
prs_decided_7d	0
prs_merged_30d	3
prs_decided_30d	3
issue_closed_ratio	0.917
closed_unmerged_prs	57
first_time_authors_30d	0
first_time_prs_merged_30d	0
first_time_prs_decided_30d	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

62Moderate

How it's scored

10/30	Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20	Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
17.9/25	Owner reach — 312 followers of theOehrly
21.8/25	Track record — 21 public repos, account ~9 yr old

Inputs used

followers	312
owner_type	User
is_verified	—
owner_login	theOehrly
public_repos	21
account_age_days	3,598

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional

How it's scored

25/25	Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35	Publish recency — latest publish 140 days ago
20/20	Version history — 77 published versions
20/20	Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked

Inputs used

packages	fastf1
ecosystems	pypi
any_deprecated	no
min_days_since_publish	140

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

90Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

84Excellent

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 6 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
16/16	Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.isort])
9.6/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4	.editorconfig
10/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 10 out of 17 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5

Inputs used

has_ci	yes
has_tests	yes
has_editorconfig	no
has_linter_config	yes
has_precommit_config	yes

Documentation

100Exceptional

How it's scored

30/30	README
25/25	Documentation directory
15/15	Documentation / homepage site — https://docs.fastf1.dev
10/10	Repository description
10/10	Topics — 3 topics
10/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	formula1, datascience, motorsport
has_wiki	yes
homepage	https://docs.fastf1.dev
docs_site	https://docs.fastf1.dev
has_readme	yes
has_docs_dir	yes
has_description	yes

Security

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

54Moderate · 16% of overall

Security posture

46Weak

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5	Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
1.2/2.5	CI-Tests — 10 out of 17 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
0/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3.8/7.5	Code-Review — Found 9/18 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
2.5/2.5	Contributors — project has 7 contributing companies or organizations
10/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5	Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5	Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5	License — license file detected
7.5/7.5	Maintained — 26 commit(s) and 9 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5	Packaging — no data
0/5	Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5	SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5	Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5	Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5	Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	16
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	2
scorecard_aggregate	4.6

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

Dependency advisories

85Excellent

How it's scored

35/35	Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
10/25	Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: msgpack 1.1.2 (high 7.5)
40/40	No advisories left outstanding — no advisory has been public longer than 90 days

Inputs used

source	osv
advisories	2
affected_packages	1
assessed_packages	39
unassessed_packages	0
affected_by_severity	high 1
direct_affected_packages	0

Matched the pypi:fastf1@3.8.3 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 39 packages. 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.

54Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

32At Risk

How it's scored

0/45	Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
32/40	Legible commit history — 60 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	no
llms_txt_url	—
legible_history_share	0.6
agent_instruction_files	—
agent_instruction_max_bytes	—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

53Moderate

How it's scored

18/18	One-command bootstrap — docs/Makefile
22/22	Automated tests
11/11	Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.isort])
0/11	Static type checking
0/10	Reproducible environment
2/10	Demonstrated agent practice — 1 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8	Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

has_nix	no
has_tests	yes
lockfiles	—
has_dockerfile	no
typed_language	no
bootstrap_files	docs/Makefile
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	yes
typecheck_configs	—
agent_commit_share	0.01
toolchain_manifests	—
dependency_bot_commit_share	0

Code legibility for models

53Moderate

How it's scored

0/45	Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
52.8/55	Manageable file sizes — 3/75 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	Python
largest_source_bytes	162,888
source_files_sampled	75
oversized_source_files	3

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional

How it's scored

0/40	API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20	MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40	Runnable examples — examples

Inputs used

example_dirs	examples
has_mcp_signal	no
api_schema_files	—
interfaces_expected_of	—

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

5,373GitHub stars

46contributors

78commits, last 12 months

20days since last push

80releases

1bus factor

32open issues

PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 486 ⇿

0Stars

486Forks

80Releases

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.

Major 1Minor 10Patch 62

Each point covers 6 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.6 / 10

4.6aggregate

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 · 2026-09-17 17:35 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
0	Branch-Protection	branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
5	CI-Tests	10 out of 17 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
0	CII-Best-Practices	no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
5	Code-Review	Found 9/18 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
10	Contributors	project has 7 contributing companies or organizations
10	Dangerous-Workflow	no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0	Dependency-Update-Tool	no update tool detected
0	Fuzzing	project is not fuzzed
10	License	license file detected
10	Maintained	26 commit(s) and 9 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/a	Packaging	packaging workflow not detected
0	Pinned-Dependencies	dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0	SAST	SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0	Security-Policy	security policy file not detected
n/a	Signed-Releases	no releases found
0	Token-Permissions	detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10	Vulnerabilities	0 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 15

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
PyPI	cryptography	`—`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	matplotlib	`>=3.8.0,<4.0.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	numpy	`>=1.26.0,<3.0.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	pandas	`>=2.1.1,<3.0.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	platformdirs	`—`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	pydantic	`—`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	pyjwt	`—`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	python-dateutil	`—`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	requests	`>=2.30.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	requests-cache	`>=1.3.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	scipy	`>=1.11.0,<2.0.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	signalrcore	`—`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	rapidfuzz	`—`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	timple	`>=0.1.6`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	websockets	`>=10.3`	pyproject.toml

All dependencies 40

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 23 direct and 17 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
PyPI	cryptography	`—`	direct
PyPI	matplotlib	`—`	direct
PyPI	matplotlib	`3.8.0`	direct
PyPI	numpy	`—`	direct
PyPI	numpy	`1.26.0`	direct
PyPI	pandas	`—`	direct
PyPI	pandas	`2.1.1`	direct
PyPI	platformdirs	`—`	direct
PyPI	pydantic	`—`	direct
PyPI	pyjwt	`—`	direct
PyPI	python-dateutil	`—`	direct
PyPI	rapidfuzz	`—`	direct
PyPI	requests	`—`	direct
PyPI	requests	`2.30.0`	direct
PyPI	requests-cache	`—`	direct
PyPI	requests-cache	`1.3.0`	direct
PyPI	scipy	`—`	direct
PyPI	scipy	`1.11.0`	direct
PyPI	signalrcore	`—`	direct
PyPI	timple	`—`	direct
PyPI	timple	`0.1.6`	direct
PyPI	websockets	`—`	direct
PyPI	websockets	`10.3`	direct
PyPI	autodocsumm	`—`	indirect
PyPI	isort	`—`	indirect
PyPI	kaleido	`—`	indirect
PyPI	plotly	`—`	indirect
PyPI	pre-commit	`—`	indirect
PyPI	pydata-sphinx-theme	`—`	indirect
PyPI	pytest	`—`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-mpl	`—`	indirect
PyPI	requests-mock	`—`	indirect
PyPI	ruff	`—`	indirect
PyPI	seaborn	`—`	indirect
PyPI	sphinx	`—`	indirect
PyPI	sphinx-autodoc-typehints	`—`	indirect
PyPI	sphinx-gallery	`—`	indirect
PyPI	sphinx-notfound-page	`—`	indirect
PyPI	wheel	`—`	indirect
PyPI	xdoctest	`—`	indirect

Dependency advisories 1

Installing pypi:fastf1@3.8.3 pulls in 39 packages, direct and transitive: 1 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct dependencies.

Package	Version	Relation	Severity	Advisories	Fixed in
msgpack	`1.1.2`	indirect	high	2	`1.2.1`

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.

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 — PyPI.

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Key facts

Data collection warnings

More detail

Feedback

Related records