Public recordExceptional
Software health reportschema 0.11.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-15 19:56 UTC
vinitkumar / json2xml
JSON-to-XML converter for Python, accelerated with a native Rust extension.
vinitkumar/json2xml holds a health index of 94 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (96/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (66/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.
94
overall / 100Software 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.
94
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 80 is calibrated to 94 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).
Ownership
Vinit KumarPersonal account
240 followers36 public repossince Dec 2010@promobi
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 | Tags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PyPI | json2xml | 6.5.0 | 318,235 | 83 | 0 days ago | json2xml |
| PyPI | json2xml_rs | 0.4.2 | - | 5 | 0 days ago | — |
Metrics by category
Vitality
Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping?
90
Development activity
83Excellent
How it's scored
| 36/36 | Push recency — last push 0 days ago |
| 18.7/36 | Commit cadence — 27/52 weeks with commits |
| 18/18 | Commit volume — 102 commits in the last year |
| 10/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 5 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |
Inputs used
| commits_last_year | 102 |
| human_commit_share | — |
| days_since_last_push | 0 |
| active_weeks_last_year | 27 |
Release discipline
100Exceptional
How it's scored
| 27/27 | Ships releases — 64 releases published |
| 36/36 | Release recency — latest release 0 days ago |
| 27/27 | Release cadence — a release every ~17.1 days |
| 0/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data |
Inputs used
| releases_count | 64 |
| latest_release_tag | v6.5.0 |
| releases_from_tags | no |
| days_since_latest_release | 0 |
| mean_days_between_releases | 17.1 |
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?
66
Popularity & adoption
46Weak
How it's scored
| 33/60 | Stars — 109 stars |
| 13/25 | Forks — 37 forks |
| 0/15 | Watchers — 1 watchers |
Inputs used
| forks | 37 |
| stars | 109 |
| watchers | 1 |
| growth_state | unverified |
| growth_factor_pct | 100 |
| growth_unverified_reason | no_history |
Community health
70Good
How it's scored
| 22.5/22.5 | README |
| 22.5/22.5 | License — recognized license (Apache-2.0) |
| 18/18 | 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 | — |
| has_contributing | yes |
| has_issue_template | no |
| has_code_of_conduct | no |
| readme_badge_services | — |
| has_pull_request_template | no |
Ecosystem adoption (downloads)
92Excellent
How it's scored
| 73.4/80 | Monthly downloads — 318,235 downloads/month across pypi |
| 0/20 | Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem |
Inputs used
| packages | json2xml |
| dependents | — |
| ecosystems | pypi |
| total_downloads | — |
| monthly_downloads | 318,235 |
| unverified_packages_excluded | json2xml_rs |
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?
67
How it's scored
| 9/54 | Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits |
| 5.8/22.5 | Commit distribution — top contributor authored 74% of commits |
| 13.5/13.5 | Contributor breadth — 13 contributors |
| 10/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations |
Inputs used
| bus_factor | 1 |
| contributors_sampled | 13 |
| top_contributor_share | 0.743 |
How it's scored
| 42/42 | Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed |
| 26.2/30 | PR acceptance — 227/260 decided PRs merged |
| 0/13 | Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d |
| 0/15 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0 |
Inputs used
| merged_prs | 227 |
| open_issues | 0 |
| closed_issues | 81 |
| prs_merged_7d | — |
| prs_decided_7d | — |
| prs_merged_30d | — |
| prs_decided_30d | — |
| issue_closed_ratio | 1 |
| closed_unmerged_prs | 33 |
| 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.
Ownership & stewardship
63Moderate
How it's scored
| 10/30 | Ownership backing — personal (user) account |
| 0/20 | Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts |
| 17.1/25 | Owner reach — 240 followers of vinitkumar |
| 23.4/25 | Track record — 36 public repos, account ~15 yr old |
Inputs used
| followers | 240 |
| owner_type | User |
| is_verified | — |
| owner_login | vinitkumar |
| public_repos | 36 |
| account_age_days | 5,679 |
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.
Package maintenance
100Exceptional
How it's scored
| 25/25 | Published & resolvable — 2 package(s) on pypi |
| 35/35 | Publish recency — latest publish 0 days ago |
| 20/20 | Version history — 83 published versions |
| 20/20 | Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked |
Inputs used
| packages | json2xml, json2xml_rs |
| ecosystems | pypi |
| any_deprecated | no |
| min_days_since_publish | 0 |
Engineering Quality
Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?
96
Engineering practices
94Exceptional
How it's scored
| 24/24 | CI workflows — 7 workflow(s) |
| 24/24 | Tests present |
| 16/16 | Linter config |
| 9.6/9.6 | Pre-commit hooks |
| 0/6.4 | .editorconfig |
| 20/20 | OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 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
100Exceptional
How it's scored
| 30/30 | README |
| 25/25 | Documentation directory |
| 15/15 | Documentation / homepage site — https://json2xml.readthedocs.io/ |
| 10/10 | Repository description |
| 10/10 | Topics — 10 topics |
| 10/10 | Wiki |
Inputs used
| topics | json, xml, python, tool, utility, ticket, jsontoxml, converter, command-line-tool, library |
| has_wiki | yes |
| homepage | https://json2xml.readthedocs.io/ |
| docs_site | https://json2xml.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?
81
Security posture
81Excellent
How it's scored
| 7.5/7.5 | Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo |
| 3.8/7.5 | Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches |
| 2.5/2.5 | CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |
| 0/2.5 | CII-Best-Practices — no data |
| 0/7.5 | Code-Review — Found 0/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0 |
| 2.5/2.5 | Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations |
| 10/10 | Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected |
| 7.5/7.5 | Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected |
| 5/5 | Fuzzing — project is fuzzed |
| 2.5/2.5 | License — license file detected |
| 7.5/7.5 | Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 5 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |
| 5/5 | Packaging — packaging workflow detected |
| 3/5 | Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6 |
| 5/5 | SAST — SAST tool is run on all commits |
| 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 |
| 2.2/7.5 | Vulnerabilities — 7 existing vulnerabilities detected |
Inputs used
| source | openssf_scorecard |
| checks_evaluated | 16 |
| scorecard_version | v5.5.0 |
| checks_inconclusive | 2 |
| scorecard_aggregate | 8.1 |
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CII-Best-Practices, 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.
78
Agent context & guidance
75Good
How it's scored
| 45/45 | Agent instructions — AGENT.md, AGENTS.md |
| 0/15 | Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) |
| 0/40 | Legible commit history — no data |
Inputs used
| has_llms_txt | no |
| llms_txt_url | — |
| legible_history_share | — |
| agent_instruction_files | AGENT.md, AGENTS.md |
| agent_instruction_max_bytes | 5,330 |
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)
80Excellent
How it's scored
| 18/18 | One-command bootstrap — Makefile, docs/Makefile |
| 22/22 | Automated tests |
| 11/11 | Lint / format config |
| 0/11 | Static type checking |
| 10/10 | Reproducible environment — lockfile |
| 0/10 | Demonstrated agent practice — no data |
| 5/8 | Automated maintenance — dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits |
| 6/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6 |
Inputs used
| has_nix | no |
| has_tests | yes |
| lockfiles | uv.lock |
| has_dockerfile | no |
| typed_language | no |
| bootstrap_files | Makefile, docs/Makefile |
| has_devcontainer | no |
| has_linter_config | yes |
| typecheck_configs | — |
| agent_commit_share | — |
| toolchain_manifests | — |
| dependency_bot_commit_share | 0 |
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice. Remaining weights renormalized.
Code legibility for models
55Moderate
How it's scored
| 0/45 | Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config |
| 55/55 | Manageable file sizes — 0/35 source files over 60KB |
Inputs used
| primary_language | Python |
| largest_source_bytes | 53,726 |
| source_files_sampled | 35 |
| oversized_source_files | 0 |
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
109GitHub stars
13contributors
102commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
64releases
1bus factor
0open issues
crates.io, PyPIpackage ecosystems
Data collection warnings
- Could not fetch crates package 'json2xml_rs' from its registry
More detail
OpenSSF Scorecard 8.1 / 10
8.1aggregate
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).
| 10 | Binary-Artifacts | no binaries found in the repo |
| 5 | Branch-Protection | branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches |
| 10 | CI-Tests | 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |
| n/a | CII-Best-Practices | internal error: error during json parsing: error during json.Unmarshal: invalid character '<' looking for beginning of value |
| 0 | Code-Review | Found 0/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0 |
| 10 | Contributors | project has 4 contributing companies or organizations |
| 10 | Dangerous-Workflow | no dangerous workflow patterns detected |
| 10 | Dependency-Update-Tool | update tool detected |
| 10 | Fuzzing | project is fuzzed |
| 10 | License | license file detected |
| 10 | Maintained | 30 commit(s) and 5 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |
| 10 | Packaging | packaging workflow detected |
| 6 | Pinned-Dependencies | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6 |
| 10 | SAST | SAST tool is run on all commits |
| 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 |
| 3 | Vulnerabilities | 7 existing vulnerabilities detected |
Direct dependencies 4
| Registry | Package | Version constraint | Manifest |
|---|---|---|---|
| PyPI | defusedxml | — | pyproject.toml |
| PyPI | urllib3 | >=2.7.0 | pyproject.toml |
| crates.io | memchr | 2.7 | rust/Cargo.toml |
| crates.io | pyo3 | 0.28.2 | rust/Cargo.toml |
All dependencies 75
Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 5 direct and 70 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.
| Registry | Package | Version | Relation |
|---|---|---|---|
| crates.io | memchr | — | direct |
| crates.io | pyo3 | — | direct |
| PyPI | defusedxml | 0.7.1 | direct |
| PyPI | urllib3 | 2.5.0 | direct |
| PyPI | urllib3 | 2.7.0 | direct |
| crates.io | arbitrary | — | indirect |
| crates.io | libfuzzer-sys | — | indirect |
| PyPI | accessible-pygments | 0.0.5 | indirect |
| PyPI | alabaster | 1.0.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | anyio | 4.8.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | autodoc | 0.5.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | babel | 2.17.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | beautifulsoup4 | 4.13.3 | indirect |
| PyPI | certifi | 2025.1.31 | indirect |
| PyPI | charset-normalizer | 3.4.1 | indirect |
| PyPI | click | 8.1.8 | indirect |
| PyPI | colorama | 0.4.6 | indirect |
| PyPI | coverage | 7.12.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | coverage | 7.13.1 | indirect |
| PyPI | decorator | 5.1.1 | indirect |
| PyPI | docutils | 0.21.2 | indirect |
| PyPI | exceptiongroup | 1.3.1 | indirect |
| PyPI | execnet | 2.1.1 | indirect |
| PyPI | furo | 2025.12.19 | indirect |
| PyPI | h11 | 0.16.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | idna | 3.15 | indirect |
| PyPI | imagesize | 1.4.1 | indirect |
| PyPI | iniconfig | 2.0.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | iniconfig | 2.3.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | jinja2 | 3.1.6 | indirect |
| PyPI | json2xml | 6.5.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | json2xml-rs | 0.4.2 | indirect |
| PyPI | legacy-cgi | 2.6.3 | indirect |
| PyPI | markupsafe | 3.0.2 | indirect |
| PyPI | mock | 5.2.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | packaging | 24.2 | indirect |
| PyPI | packaging | 25.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | pluggy | 1.5.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | pluggy | 1.6.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | pygments | 2.20.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | pytest | 9.0.3 | indirect |
| PyPI | pytest-cov | 7.0.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | pytest-xdist | 3.8.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | requests | 2.32.4 | indirect |
| PyPI | roman-numerals | 4.1.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | ruff | 0.12.8 | indirect |
| PyPI | setuptools | 80.9.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | setuptools | 82.0.1 | indirect |
| PyPI | sniffio | 1.3.1 | indirect |
| PyPI | snowballstemmer | 2.2.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | soupsieve | 2.8.4 | indirect |
| PyPI | sphinx | 9.1.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | sphinx-autobuild | 2025.8.25 | indirect |
| PyPI | sphinx-autodoc-typehints | 3.9.8 | indirect |
| PyPI | sphinx-basic-ng | 1.0.0b2 | indirect |
| PyPI | sphinxcontrib-applehelp | 2.0.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | sphinxcontrib-devhelp | 2.0.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | sphinxcontrib-htmlhelp | 2.1.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | sphinxcontrib-jsmath | 1.0.1 | indirect |
| PyPI | sphinxcontrib-qthelp | 2.0.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | sphinxcontrib-serializinghtml | 2.0.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | starlette | 1.3.1 | indirect |
| PyPI | tomli | 2.3.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | tomli | 2.4.1 | indirect |
| PyPI | tornado | 6.5.7 | indirect |
| PyPI | typing-extensions | 4.12.2 | indirect |
| PyPI | typing-extensions | 4.15.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | uvicorn | 0.34.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | waitress | 3.0.2 | indirect |
| PyPI | watchfiles | 1.0.4 | indirect |
| PyPI | webob | 1.8.10 | indirect |
| PyPI | websockets | 15.0 | indirect |
| PyPI | webtest | 3.0.4 | indirect |
| PyPI | xmltodict | 0.14.2 | indirect |
| PyPI | xmltodict | 1.0.2 | indirect |
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 v0.11.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.
How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics — PyPI.