Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-27 16:28 UTC

tox-dev / pipdeptree

A command line utility to display dependency tree of the installed Python packages

Rust · PythonMIT★ 3,018 stars⑂ 162 forkssince Feb 2014View on GitHub ↗

KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

tox-dev/pipdeptree holds a health index of 97 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Vitality (99/100) and lowest on Sustainability & Governance (76/100). It was last updated today. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

overall / 100

Exceptional

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 85 is calibrated to 97 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

tox development teamOrganization

142 followers49 public repossince Jul 2016

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

Package ecosystems

Registry	Package	Version	Downloads / mo	Versions	Last publish	Tags
PyPI	pipdeptree	4.2.2	8,266,764	97	0 days ago	application cache directory log user

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

99Exceptional · 21% of overall

Development activity

99Exceptional

How it's scored

36/36	Push recency — last push 0 days ago
34.6/36	Commit cadence — 50/52 weeks with commits
18/18	Commit volume — 178 commits in the last year
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

commits_last_year	178
human_commit_share	0.46
days_since_last_push	0
active_weeks_last_year	50

Release discipline

100Exceptional

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 71 releases published
36/36	Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27	Release cadence — a release every ~13.1 days
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data

Inputs used

releases_count	71
latest_release_tag	4.2.2
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	0
mean_days_between_releases	13.1

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?

76Good · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

83Excellent

How it's scored

56.4/60	Stars — 3,018 stars
18.4/25	Forks — 162 forks
8.3/15	Watchers — 32 watchers

Inputs used

forks	162
stars	3,018
watchers	32
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

50Moderate

How it's scored

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

Inputs used

has_readme	yes
has_license	yes
readme_badges	5
has_contributing	no
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	no
readme_badge_services	github.com, readthedocs.org, shields.io
has_pull_request_template	no

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

100Exceptional

How it's scored

80/80	Monthly downloads — 8,266,764 downloads/month across pypi
0/20	Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem

Inputs used

packages	pipdeptree
dependents	—
ecosystems	pypi
total_downloads	—
monthly_downloads	8,266,764
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?

76Good · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

61Moderate

How it's scored

25.2/54	Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
12.4/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 45% of commits
13.5/13.5	Contributor breadth — 50 contributors
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 10 contributing companies or organizations

Inputs used

bus_factor	2
contributors_sampled	50
top_contributor_share	0.451

Issue & PR responsiveness

82Excellent

How it's scored

42/42	Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
26.4/30	PR acceptance — 442/503 decided PRs merged
0/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
3/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 2/9 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2

Inputs used

merged_prs	442
open_issues	0
closed_issues	181
prs_merged_7d	4
prs_decided_7d	4
prs_merged_30d	16
prs_decided_30d	16
issue_closed_ratio	1
closed_unmerged_prs	61
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

70Good

How it's scored

30/30	Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20	Verified domain
15.5/25	Owner reach — 142 followers of tox-dev
24.4/25	Track record — 49 public repos, account ~10 yr old

Inputs used

followers	142
owner_type	Organization
is_verified	no
owner_login	tox-dev
public_repos	49
account_age_days	3,702

Package maintenance

100Exceptional

How it's scored

25/25	Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35	Publish recency — latest publish 0 days ago
20/20	Version history — 97 published versions
20/20	Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked

Inputs used

packages	pipdeptree
ecosystems	pypi
any_deprecated	no
min_days_since_publish	0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

92Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

94Exceptional

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 4 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
16/16	Linter config — Cargo.toml ([lints]), pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
9.6/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4	.editorconfig
20/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 29 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

has_ci	yes
has_tests	yes
has_editorconfig	no
has_linter_config	yes
has_precommit_config	yes

Documentation

90Excellent

How it's scored

30/30	README
25/25	Documentation directory
15/15	Documentation / homepage site — https://pipdeptree.readthedocs.io
10/10	Repository description
10/10	Topics — 3 topics
0/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	python, pip, dependency-graph
has_wiki	no
homepage	https://pipdeptree.readthedocs.io
docs_site	https://pipdeptree.readthedocs.io
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?

83Excellent · 16% of overall

Security posture

79Good

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5	Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5	CI-Tests — 29 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1.5/7.5	Code-Review — Found 2/9 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
2.5/2.5	Contributors — project has 10 contributing companies or organizations
10/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5	Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5	Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5	License — license file detected
7.5/7.5	Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5	Packaging — packaging workflow detected
5/5	Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
3.5/5	SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 7
5/5	Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5	Signed-Releases — no data
7.5/7.5	Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	17
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	1
scorecard_aggregate	7.9

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

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional

How it's scored

35/35	Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25	Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40	No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date

Inputs used

source	osv
advisories	0
affected_packages	0
assessed_packages	139
unassessed_packages	18
affected_by_severity	none
direct_affected_packages	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 139 resolved dependencies against OSV. 18 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.

77Good · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

55Moderate

How it's scored

0/45	Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
15/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://pipdeptree.readthedocs.io/llms.txt)
40/40	Legible commit history — 40 of 46 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	yes
llms_txt_url	https://pipdeptree.readthedocs.io/llms.txt
legible_history_share	0.87
agent_instruction_files	—
agent_instruction_max_bytes	—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

85Excellent

How it's scored

12.6/18	One-command bootstrap — Cargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22	Automated tests
11/11	Lint / format config — Cargo.toml ([lints]), pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
11/11	Static type checking — src/pipdeptree/py.typed
10/10	Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10	Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8	Automated maintenance — 41 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned

Inputs used

has_nix	no
has_tests	yes
lockfiles	Cargo.lock
has_dockerfile	no
typed_language	yes
bootstrap_files	—
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	yes
typecheck_configs	src/pipdeptree/py.typed
agent_commit_share	0
toolchain_manifests	Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share	0.41

Code legibility for models

100Exceptional

How it's scored

45/45	Type-checkable code — Rust (statically typed)
55/55	Manageable file sizes — 0/74 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	Rust
largest_source_bytes	24,809
source_files_sampled	74
oversized_source_files	0

Key facts

3,018GitHub stars

50contributors

178commits, last 12 months

0days since last push

71releases

2bus factor

0open issues

crates.io, PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
Could not fetch crates package 'pipdeptree' from its registry
deps.dev does not index pypi:pipdeptree@4.2.2; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 162 ⇿

0Stars

162Forks

70Releases

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 2Minor 36Patch 32

Each point covers 12 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.9 / 10

7.9aggregate

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 · 2026-08-27 16:28 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
3	Branch-Protection	branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10	CI-Tests	29 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0	CII-Best-Practices	no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2	Code-Review	Found 2/9 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
10	Contributors	project has 10 contributing companies or organizations
10	Dangerous-Workflow	no dangerous workflow patterns detected
10	Dependency-Update-Tool	update tool detected
0	Fuzzing	project is not fuzzed
10	License	license file detected
10	Maintained	30 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10	Packaging	packaging workflow detected
10	Pinned-Dependencies	all dependencies are pinned
7	SAST	SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 7
10	Security-Policy	security policy file detected
n/a	Signed-Releases	no releases found
10	Token-Permissions	GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10	Vulnerabilities	0 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 16

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
crates.io	anstyle	`1.0.14`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	clap	`4.6.1`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	csv	`1.4.0`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	glob	`0.3.3`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	pep508_rs	`0.9.2`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	pyo3	`0.29.0`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	rayon	`1.12.0`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	rustc-hash	`2.1.3`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	serde	`1.0.228`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	serde_json	`1.0.150`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	tempfile	`3.27.0`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	thiserror	`2.0.18`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	toml	`1.1.2`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	url	`2.5.8`	Cargo.toml
PyPI	nab-index	`>=0.0.11`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	nab-project	`>=0.0.14`	pyproject.toml

All dependencies 157

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 17 direct and 140 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
crates.io	anstyle	`1.0.14`	direct
crates.io	clap	`4.6.6`	direct
crates.io	csv	`1.4.0`	direct
crates.io	glob	`0.3.4`	direct
crates.io	pep508_rs	`0.9.2`	direct
crates.io	pyo3	`0.29.2`	direct
crates.io	rayon	`1.12.0`	direct
crates.io	rustc-hash	`2.1.3`	direct
crates.io	serde	`1.0.229`	direct
crates.io	serde_json	`1.0.151`	direct
crates.io	tempfile	`3.27.0`	direct
crates.io	thiserror	`1.0.69`	direct
crates.io	thiserror	`2.0.20`	direct
crates.io	toml	`1.1.4+spec-1.1.0`	direct
crates.io	url	`2.5.8`	direct
PyPI	nab-index	`—`	direct
PyPI	nab-project	`—`	direct
crates.io	aho-corasick	`1.1.4`	indirect
crates.io	anstream	`1.0.0`	indirect
crates.io	anstyle-parse	`1.0.0`	indirect
crates.io	anstyle-query	`1.1.5`	indirect
crates.io	anstyle-wincon	`3.0.11`	indirect
crates.io	bitflags	`2.13.0`	indirect
crates.io	boxcar	`0.2.14`	indirect
crates.io	cfg-if	`1.0.4`	indirect
crates.io	clap_builder	`4.6.6`	indirect
crates.io	clap_derive	`4.6.4`	indirect
crates.io	clap_lex	`1.1.0`	indirect
crates.io	colorchoice	`1.0.5`	indirect
crates.io	crossbeam-deque	`0.8.7`	indirect
crates.io	crossbeam-epoch	`0.9.20`	indirect
crates.io	crossbeam-utils	`0.8.22`	indirect
crates.io	csv-core	`0.1.13`	indirect
crates.io	displaydoc	`0.2.6`	indirect
crates.io	downcast	`0.11.0`	indirect
crates.io	either	`1.16.0`	indirect
crates.io	equivalent	`1.0.2`	indirect
crates.io	errno	`0.3.14`	indirect
crates.io	fastrand	`2.4.1`	indirect
crates.io	form_urlencoded	`1.2.2`	indirect
crates.io	fragile	`2.1.0`	indirect
crates.io	futures-core	`0.3.32`	indirect
crates.io	futures-macro	`0.3.32`	indirect
crates.io	futures-task	`0.3.32`	indirect
crates.io	futures-timer	`3.0.4`	indirect
crates.io	futures-util	`0.3.32`	indirect
crates.io	getrandom	`0.4.3`	indirect
crates.io	hashbrown	`0.17.1`	indirect
crates.io	heck	`0.5.0`	indirect
crates.io	icu_collections	`2.2.0`	indirect
crates.io	icu_locale_core	`2.2.0`	indirect
crates.io	icu_normalizer	`2.2.0`	indirect
crates.io	icu_normalizer_data	`2.2.0`	indirect
crates.io	icu_properties	`2.2.0`	indirect
crates.io	icu_properties_data	`2.2.0`	indirect
crates.io	icu_provider	`2.2.0`	indirect
crates.io	idna	`1.1.0`	indirect
crates.io	idna_adapter	`1.2.2`	indirect
crates.io	indexmap	`2.14.0`	indirect
crates.io	is_terminal_polyfill	`1.70.2`	indirect
crates.io	itertools	`0.13.0`	indirect
crates.io	itoa	`1.0.18`	indirect
crates.io	libc	`0.2.186`	indirect
crates.io	linux-raw-sys	`0.12.1`	indirect
crates.io	litemap	`0.8.2`	indirect
crates.io	lock_api	`0.4.14`	indirect
crates.io	memchr	`2.8.3`	indirect
crates.io	mockall	`0.15.0`	indirect
crates.io	mockall_derive	`0.15.0`	indirect
crates.io	once_cell	`1.21.4`	indirect
crates.io	once_cell_polyfill	`1.70.2`	indirect
crates.io	parking_lot	`0.12.5`	indirect
crates.io	parking_lot_core	`0.9.12`	indirect
crates.io	pep440_rs	`0.7.3`	indirect
crates.io	percent-encoding	`2.3.2`	indirect
crates.io	pin-project-lite	`0.2.17`	indirect
crates.io	portable-atomic	`1.13.1`	indirect
crates.io	potential_utf	`0.1.5`	indirect
crates.io	predicates	`3.1.4`	indirect
crates.io	predicates-core	`1.0.10`	indirect
crates.io	predicates-tree	`1.0.13`	indirect
crates.io	proc-macro-crate	`3.5.0`	indirect
crates.io	proc-macro2	`1.0.106`	indirect
crates.io	pyo3-build-config	`0.29.2`	indirect
crates.io	pyo3-ffi	`0.29.2`	indirect
crates.io	pyo3-macros	`0.29.2`	indirect
crates.io	pyo3-macros-backend	`0.29.2`	indirect
crates.io	quote	`1.0.46`	indirect
crates.io	r-efi	`6.0.0`	indirect
crates.io	rayon-core	`1.13.0`	indirect
crates.io	redox_syscall	`0.5.18`	indirect
crates.io	regex	`1.13.0`	indirect
crates.io	regex-automata	`0.4.15`	indirect
crates.io	regex-syntax	`0.8.11`	indirect
crates.io	relative-path	`1.9.3`	indirect
crates.io	rstest	`0.26.1`	indirect
crates.io	rstest_macros	`0.26.1`	indirect
crates.io	rustc_version	`0.4.1`	indirect
crates.io	rustix	`1.1.4`	indirect
crates.io	ryu	`1.0.23`	indirect
crates.io	scopeguard	`1.2.0`	indirect
crates.io	semver	`1.0.28`	indirect
crates.io	serde_core	`1.0.229`	indirect
crates.io	serde_derive	`1.0.229`	indirect
crates.io	serde_spanned	`1.1.1`	indirect
crates.io	slab	`0.4.12`	indirect
crates.io	smallvec	`1.15.2`	indirect
crates.io	stable_deref_trait	`1.2.1`	indirect
crates.io	strsim	`0.11.1`	indirect
crates.io	syn	`2.0.118`	indirect
crates.io	syn	`3.0.3`	indirect
crates.io	synstructure	`0.13.2`	indirect
crates.io	target-lexicon	`0.13.5`	indirect
crates.io	temp-env	`0.3.6`	indirect
crates.io	termtree	`0.5.1`	indirect
crates.io	thiserror-impl	`1.0.69`	indirect
crates.io	thiserror-impl	`2.0.20`	indirect
crates.io	tinystr	`0.8.3`	indirect
crates.io	toml_datetime	`1.1.1+spec-1.1.0`	indirect
crates.io	toml_edit	`0.25.12+spec-1.1.0`	indirect
crates.io	toml_parser	`1.1.3+spec-1.1.0`	indirect
crates.io	toml_writer	`1.1.2+spec-1.1.0`	indirect
crates.io	unicode-ident	`1.0.24`	indirect
crates.io	unicode-width	`0.2.2`	indirect
crates.io	unscanny	`0.1.0`	indirect
crates.io	urlencoding	`2.1.3`	indirect
crates.io	utf8_iter	`1.0.4`	indirect
crates.io	utf8parse	`0.2.2`	indirect
crates.io	version-ranges	`0.1.3`	indirect
crates.io	windows-link	`0.2.1`	indirect
crates.io	windows-sys	`0.61.2`	indirect
crates.io	winnow	`1.0.4`	indirect
crates.io	writeable	`0.6.3`	indirect
crates.io	yoke	`0.8.3`	indirect
crates.io	yoke-derive	`0.8.2`	indirect
crates.io	zerofrom	`0.1.8`	indirect
crates.io	zerofrom-derive	`0.1.7`	indirect
crates.io	zerotrie	`0.2.4`	indirect
crates.io	zerovec	`0.11.6`	indirect
crates.io	zerovec-derive	`0.11.3`	indirect
crates.io	zmij	`1.0.23`	indirect
PyPI	covdefaults	`—`	indirect
PyPI	diff-cover	`—`	indirect
PyPI	furo	`—`	indirect
PyPI	meson	`—`	indirect
PyPI	meson-python	`—`	indirect
PyPI	ninja	`—`	indirect
PyPI	pluggy	`—`	indirect
PyPI	pytest	`—`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-cov	`—`	indirect
PyPI	sphinx	`—`	indirect
PyPI	sphinx-copybutton	`—`	indirect
PyPI	sphinx-inline-tabs	`—`	indirect
PyPI	sphinx-llm	`—`	indirect
PyPI	sphinxcontrib-mermaid	`—`	indirect
PyPI	sphinxcontrib-towncrier	`—`	indirect
PyPI	towncrier	`—`	indirect

Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 139 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 18 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.

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