Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-20 04:08 UTC

traefik / mesh

Traefik Mesh - Simpler Service Mesh

GoApache-2.0★ 2,101 stars⑂ 145 forkssince May 2019View on GitHub ↗

KindNetwork serviceLibraryhow this is determined

#traefik #mesh #service-mesh #service-mesh-interface #traefik-mesh

traefik/mesh holds a health index of 53 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (86/100) and lowest on Vitality (28/100). It was last updated 180 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

overall / 100

Moderate

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 58 is calibrated to 62 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Traefik LabsOrganization

1,144 followers65 public repossince Sep 2015TraefikLabs

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
Go	github.com/traefik/mesh	v1.4.8	-	27	1492 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

28At Risk · 21% of overall

Development activity

15Critical

Abandonment alert

Work has arrived and nobody has attended to it

no human commit in 180 daysautomated commits excludedissues left unanswereda published fix left unappliedreleases stalledOpenSSF Scorecard reports it unmaintainedcontinuous integration broken

Silence alone is never the finding — a small, finished library may need no commits for years. This alert requires both: no human commit for a long time, and obligations the project is visibly not discharging. Automated commits do not count as maintenance.

How abandonment is assessed

How it's scored

9.9/36	Push recency — last push 180 days ago
0.7/36	Commit cadence — 1/52 weeks with commits
4.3/18	Commit volume — 2 commits in the last year
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

commits_last_year	2
human_commit_share	1
days_since_last_push	180
active_weeks_last_year	1

Release discipline

47Weak

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 25 releases published
0/36	Release recency — latest release 1,492 days ago
19.8/27	Release cadence — a release every ~85.7 days
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.

Inputs used

releases_count	25
latest_release_tag	v1.4.8
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	1,492
mean_days_between_releases	85.7

Community & Adoption

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?

86Excellent · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

81Excellent

How it's scored

53.9/60	Stars — 2,101 stars
18/25	Forks — 145 forks
9.1/15	Watchers — 44 watchers

Inputs used

forks	145
stars	2,101
watchers	44
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 (Apache-2.0)
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	5
has_contributing	yes
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	yes
readme_badge_services	goreportcard.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_template	yes

Sustainability & Governance

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep?

74Good · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

62Moderate

How it's scored

25.2/54	Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
13.5/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 40% of commits
13.5/13.5	Contributor breadth — 31 contributors
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 11 contributing companies or organizations

Inputs used

bus_factor	2
contributors_sampled	31
top_contributor_share	0.398

Issue & PR responsiveness

90Excellent

How it's scored

37.5/42	Issue resolution — 89% of issues closed
27.6/30	PR acceptance — 440/478 decided PRs merged
0/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
13.5/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 28/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9

Inputs used

merged_prs	440
open_issues	41
closed_issues	337
prs_merged_7d	0
prs_decided_7d	0
prs_merged_30d	0
prs_decided_30d	2
issue_closed_ratio	0.892
closed_unmerged_prs	38
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

77Good

How it's scored

30/30	Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20	Verified domain
22/25	Owner reach — 1,144 followers of traefik
25/25	Track record — 65 public repos, account ~11 yr old

Inputs used

followers	1,144
owner_type	Organization
is_verified	no
owner_login	traefik
public_repos	65
account_age_days	4,023

Package maintenance

69Good

How it's scored

25/25	Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on go
4/35	Publish recency — latest publish 1,492 days ago
20/20	Version history — 27 published versions
20/20	Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked

Inputs used

packages	github.com/traefik/mesh
ecosystems	go
any_deprecated	no
min_days_since_publish	1,492

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

65Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

48Weak

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
0/16	Linter config
0/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4	.editorconfig
0/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 2 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

has_ci	yes
has_tests	yes
has_editorconfig	no
has_linter_config	no
has_precommit_config	no

Documentation

90Excellent

How it's scored

30/30	README
25/25	Documentation directory
15/15	Documentation / homepage site — https://traefik.io/traefik-mesh
10/10	Repository description
10/10	Topics — 5 topics
0/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	traefik, mesh, service-mesh, service-mesh-interface, traefik-mesh
has_wiki	no
homepage	https://traefik.io/traefik-mesh
docs_site	https://traefik.io/traefik-mesh
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?

35Weak · 16% of overall

Security posture

32At Risk

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5	Branch-Protection — no data
0/2.5	CI-Tests — 2 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6.8/7.5	Code-Review — Found 28/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
2.5/2.5	Contributors — project has 11 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
0/7.5	Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
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 — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5	Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 148 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	16
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	2
scorecard_aggregate	3.2

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

Dependency advisories

45Weak

How it's scored

5.9/35	Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 2 affected: github.com/traefik/traefik/v2 2.8.3 (critical 10.0), github.com/sirupsen/logrus 1.8.1 (high 7.5)
0/25	Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
27.8/40	No advisories left outstanding — 2 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 1,440 days ago

Inputs used

source	osv
advisories	263
affected_packages	22
assessed_packages	101
unassessed_packages	0
affected_by_severity	critical 2, high 15, moderate 4, unknown 1
direct_affected_packages	2

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 101 resolved dependencies against OSV. 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.

54Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

22At Risk

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://traefik.io/llms.txt)
6.9/40	Legible commit history — 13 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	yes
llms_txt_url	https://traefik.io/llms.txt
legible_history_share	0.13
agent_instruction_files	—
agent_instruction_max_bytes	—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

61Moderate

How it's scored

18/18	One-command bootstrap — Makefile, docs/Makefile
22/22	Automated tests
0/11	Lint / format config
11/11	Static type checking — Go (statically typed)
10/10	Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10	Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
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	go.sum
has_dockerfile	yes
typed_language	yes
bootstrap_files	Makefile, docs/Makefile
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	no
typecheck_configs	—
agent_commit_share	0
toolchain_manifests	go.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share	0

Code legibility for models

100Exceptional

How it's scored

45/45	Type-checkable code — Go (statically typed)
55/55	Manageable file sizes — 0/56 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	Go
largest_source_bytes	48,341
source_files_sampled	56
oversized_source_files	0

Key facts

2,101GitHub stars

31contributors

2commits, last 12 months

180days since last push

25releases

2bus factor

41open issues

Go, 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 ★ / 145 ⇿

0Stars

145Forks

24Releases

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 11Patch 9

Each point covers 7 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.2 / 10

3.2aggregate

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 · 2026-09-20 04:08 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
n/a	Branch-Protection	internal 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
0	CI-Tests	2 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0	CII-Best-Practices	no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
9	Code-Review	Found 28/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
10	Contributors	project has 11 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
0	Maintained	0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
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
0	Signed-Releases	Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0	Token-Permissions	detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0	Vulnerabilities	148 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 14

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
Go	github.com/cenkalti/backoff/v4	`v4.1.1`	go.mod
Go	github.com/go-check/check	`v0.0.0-20180628173108-788fd7840127`	go.mod
Go	github.com/google/uuid	`v1.3.0`	go.mod
Go	github.com/gorilla/mux	`v1.8.0`	go.mod
Go	github.com/hashicorp/go-version	`v1.3.0`	go.mod
Go	github.com/servicemeshinterface/smi-sdk-go	`v0.4.1`	go.mod
Go	github.com/sirupsen/logrus	`v1.8.1`	go.mod
Go	github.com/stretchr/testify	`v1.8.0`	go.mod
Go	github.com/traefik/paerser	`v0.1.8`	go.mod
Go	github.com/traefik/traefik/v2	`v2.8.3`	go.mod
Go	github.com/vdemeester/shakers	`v0.1.0`	go.mod
Go	k8s.io/api	`v0.22.5`	go.mod
Go	k8s.io/apimachinery	`v0.22.5`	go.mod
Go	k8s.io/client-go	`v0.22.5`	go.mod

All dependencies 101

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 14 direct and 87 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
Go	github.com/cenkalti/backoff/v4	`4.1.1`	direct
Go	github.com/go-check/check	`0.0.0-20180628173108-788fd7840127`	direct
Go	github.com/google/uuid	`1.3.0`	direct
Go	github.com/gorilla/mux	`1.8.0`	direct
Go	github.com/hashicorp/go-version	`1.3.0`	direct
Go	github.com/servicemeshinterface/smi-sdk-go	`0.4.1`	direct
Go	github.com/sirupsen/logrus	`1.8.1`	direct
Go	github.com/stretchr/testify	`1.8.0`	direct
Go	github.com/traefik/paerser	`0.1.8`	direct
Go	github.com/traefik/traefik/v2	`2.8.3`	direct
Go	github.com/vdemeester/shakers	`0.1.0`	direct
Go	k8s.io/api	`0.22.5`	direct
Go	k8s.io/apimachinery	`0.22.5`	direct
Go	k8s.io/client-go	`0.22.5`	direct
Go	github.com/burntsushi/toml	`1.1.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/davecgh/go-spew	`1.1.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/evanphx/json-patch	`4.11.0+incompatible`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-acme/lego/v4	`4.7.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-logr/logr	`0.4.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/gogo/protobuf	`1.3.2`	indirect
Go	github.com/golang/protobuf	`1.5.2`	indirect
Go	github.com/google/go-cmp	`0.5.7`	indirect
Go	github.com/google/gofuzz	`1.2.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/googleapis/gnostic	`0.5.5`	indirect
Go	github.com/huandu/xstrings	`1.3.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/imdario/mergo	`0.3.12`	indirect
Go	github.com/json-iterator/go	`1.1.12`	indirect
Go	github.com/masterminds/goutils	`1.1.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/masterminds/semver/v3	`3.1.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/masterminds/sprig/v3	`3.2.2`	indirect
Go	github.com/mitchellh/copystructure	`1.0.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/mitchellh/reflectwalk	`1.0.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/modern-go/concurrent	`0.0.0-20180306012644-bacd9c7ef1dd`	indirect
Go	github.com/modern-go/reflect2	`1.0.2`	indirect
Go	github.com/patrickmn/go-cache	`2.1.0+incompatible`	indirect
Go	github.com/pkg/errors	`0.9.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/pmezard/go-difflib	`1.0.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/shopspring/decimal	`1.2.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/spf13/cast	`1.3.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/spf13/pflag	`1.0.5`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/crypto	`0.0.0-20220427172511-eb4f295cb31f`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/net	`0.0.0-20220624214902-1bab6f366d9e`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/oauth2	`0.0.0-20220223155221-ee480838109b`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/sys	`0.0.0-20220704084225-05e143d24a9e`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/term	`0.0.0-20210927222741-03fcf44c2211`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/text	`0.3.7`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/time	`0.0.0-20211116232009-f0f3c7e86c11`	indirect
Go	google.golang.org/appengine	`1.6.7`	indirect
Go	google.golang.org/protobuf	`1.28.0`	indirect
Go	gopkg.in/inf.v0	`0.9.1`	indirect
Go	gopkg.in/square/go-jose.v2	`2.6.0`	indirect
Go	gopkg.in/yaml.v2	`2.4.0`	indirect
Go	gopkg.in/yaml.v3	`3.0.1`	indirect
Go	k8s.io/klog/v2	`2.10.0`	indirect
Go	k8s.io/kube-openapi	`0.0.0-20211109043538-20434351676c`	indirect
Go	k8s.io/utils	`0.0.0-20210820185131-d34e5cb4466e`	indirect
Go	sigs.k8s.io/structured-merge-diff/v4	`4.1.2`	indirect
Go	sigs.k8s.io/yaml	`1.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	appdirs	`1.4.4`	indirect
PyPI	cachecontrol	`0.12.10`	indirect
PyPI	certifi	`2020.12.5`	indirect
PyPI	charset-normalizer	`2.0.7`	indirect
PyPI	click	`8.1.2`	indirect
PyPI	colorama	`0.4.4`	indirect
PyPI	contextlib2	`21.6.0`	indirect
PyPI	distlib	`0.3.3`	indirect
PyPI	distro	`1.6.0`	indirect
PyPI	ghp-import	`2.0.2`	indirect
PyPI	html5lib	`1.1`	indirect
PyPI	idna	`3.3`	indirect
PyPI	importlib-metadata	`4.11.3`	indirect
PyPI	jinja2	`3.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	lockfile	`0.12.2`	indirect
PyPI	markdown	`3.3.6`	indirect
PyPI	markdown-include	`0.5.1`	indirect
PyPI	markupsafe	`2.1.1`	indirect
PyPI	mergedeep	`1.3.4`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocs	`1.2.2`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocs-bootswatch	`1.0`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocs-material-extensions	`1.0.3`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocs-traefiklabs	`100.0.10`	indirect
PyPI	msgpack	`1.0.2`	indirect
PyPI	ordered-set	`4.0.2`	indirect
PyPI	packaging	`20.9`	indirect
PyPI	pep517	`0.12.0`	indirect
PyPI	progress	`1.6`	indirect
PyPI	pygments	`2.11.2`	indirect
PyPI	pymdown-extensions	`7.0`	indirect
PyPI	pyparsing	`2.4.7`	indirect
PyPI	python-dateutil	`2.8.2`	indirect
PyPI	pyyaml	`6.0.2`	indirect
PyPI	pyyaml-env-tag	`0.1`	indirect
PyPI	requests	`2.26.0`	indirect
PyPI	retrying	`1.3.3`	indirect
PyPI	six	`1.16.0`	indirect
PyPI	toml	`0.10.2`	indirect
PyPI	tomli	`1.2.2`	indirect
PyPI	urllib3	`1.26.7`	indirect
PyPI	watchdog	`2.1.7`	indirect
PyPI	webencodings	`0.5.1`	indirect
PyPI	zipp	`3.8.0`	indirect

Dependency advisories 22

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 101 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 22 carry known advisories, of which 2 are direct.

Package	Version	Relation	Severity	Advisories	Fixed in
github.com/traefik/traefik/v2	`2.8.3`	direct	critical	110	`3.7.13`
golang.org/x/crypto	`0.0.0-20220427172511-eb4f295cb31f`	indirect	critical	42	`3.4.0`
github.com/sirupsen/logrus	`1.8.1`	direct	high	2	`1.9.3`
certifi	`2020.12.5`	indirect	high	5	`2024.7.4`
click	`8.1.2`	indirect	high	1	`8.3.3`
github.com/go-acme/lego/v4	`4.7.0`	indirect	high	4	`4.34.0`
golang.org/x/net	`0.0.0-20220624214902-1bab6f366d9e`	indirect	high	31	`12.0.2`
golang.org/x/oauth2	`0.0.0-20220223155221-ee480838109b`	indirect	high	2	`0.27.0`
golang.org/x/text	`0.3.7`	indirect	high	3	`0.39.0`
google.golang.org/protobuf	`1.28.0`	indirect	high	2	`1.33.0`
idna	`3.3`	indirect	high	4	`3.15`
jinja2	`3.0.0`	indirect	high	10	`3.1.6`
markdown	`3.3.6`	indirect	high	2	`3.8.1`
mkdocs	`1.2.2`	indirect	high	2	`1.2.3`
msgpack	`1.0.2`	indirect	high	2	`1.2.1`
pymdown-extensions	`7.0`	indirect	high	8	`11.0.1`
urllib3	`1.26.7`	indirect	high	16	`2.7.0`
gopkg.in/square/go-jose.v2	`2.6.0`	indirect	moderate	2	`4.0.1`
pygments	`2.11.2`	indirect	moderate	4	`2.20.0`
requests	`2.26.0`	indirect	moderate	8	`2.33.0`
zipp	`3.8.0`	indirect	moderate	2	`3.19.1`
golang.org/x/sys	`0.0.0-20220704084225-05e143d24a9e`	indirect	unknown	1	`0.44.0`

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 — Go.

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Key facts

Data collection warnings

More detail

Feedback

Related records