Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-30 10:48 UTC

watchexec / process-wrap

Wrap a Command, to spawn processes in a group or session or job object etc (successor to command-group)

RustCustom license★ 45 stars⑂ 12 forkssince Mar 2024View on GitHub ↗

watchexec/process-wrap holds a health index of 80 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (80/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (54/100). It was last updated 4 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

80
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.

80
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 68 is calibrated to 80 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

watchexecOrganization
67 followers7 public repossince Aug 2018

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
crates.ioprocess-wrap10.0.01,771,684205 days agocommandgroupprocessptysession

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

72Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 4 days ago
4.2/36Commit cadence6/52 weeks with commits
16.2/18Commit volume63 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year63
human_commit_share0.99
days_since_last_push4
active_weeks_last_year6
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases34 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recencylatest release 5 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~90.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count34
latest_release_tagv10.0.0
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release5
mean_days_between_releases90.6
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?

54Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
26.7/60Stars45 stars
8.7/25Forks12 forks
0/15Watchers1 watchers
Inputs used
forks12
stars45
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
16.9/22.5Licenselicense file present, not a recognized license
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges3
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesbadgen.net, github.com
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads1,771,684 downloads/month across crates
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesprocess-wrap
dependents
ecosystemscrates
total_downloads12,129,562
monthly_downloads1,771,684
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?

63Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
1.4/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 94% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth16 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled16
top_contributor_share0.936
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution100% of issues closed
16.9/30PR acceptance18/32 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/6 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs18
open_issues0
closed_issues13
prs_merged_7d5
prs_decided_7d9
prs_merged_30d5
prs_decided_30d10
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs14
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
13.2/25Owner reach67 followers of watchexec
18.6/25Track record7 public repos, account ~8 yr old
Inputs used
followers67
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginwatchexec
public_repos7
account_age_days2,936

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on crates
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 5 days ago
20/20Version history20 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesprocess-wrap
ecosystemscrates
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish5

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

80Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.rustfmt.toml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests6 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://docs.rs/process-wrap
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://docs.rs/process-wrap
docs_sitehttps://docs.rs/process-wrap
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

70Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests6 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/6 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 5 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
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
5/5Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
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
7.5/7.5Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
5.2/7.5Vulnerabilities3 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate6.2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories3
affected_packages3
assessed_packages106
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityunknown 3
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 106 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.

76Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history94 of 99 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.949
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrapCargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config.rustfmt.toml
11/11Static type checkingRust (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice13 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance1 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesCargo.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0.13
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0.01
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeRust (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/77 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes22,770
source_files_sampled77
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

45GitHub stars
16contributors
63commits, last 12 months
4days since last push
34releases
1bus factor
0open issues
crates.iopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 12 ⇿
0Stars
12Forks
13Releases

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.

0246810121212024-032025-032026-02
Major 3Minor 3Patch 7

Each point covers 2 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.2 / 10
6.2aggregate

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 · 2026-08-30 10:47 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests6 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/6 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
9Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7Vulnerabilities3 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 4
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.iofutures0.3.30Cargo.toml
crates.ioindexmap2.9.0Cargo.toml
crates.iotokio1.38.2Cargo.toml
crates.iotracing0.1.40Cargo.toml
All dependencies 106

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 4 direct and 102 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
crates.iofutures0.3.31direct
crates.ioindexmap2.13.0direct
crates.iotokio1.49.0direct
crates.iotracing0.1.44direct
crates.ioaddr2line0.25.1indirect
crates.ioadler22.0.1indirect
crates.ioaho-corasick1.1.4indirect
crates.ioanyhow1.0.101indirect
crates.iobindgen0.70.1indirect
crates.iobindgen0.72.1indirect
crates.iobitflags1.3.2indirect
crates.iobitflags2.10.0indirect
crates.iobytes1.11.1indirect
crates.iocexpr0.6.0indirect
crates.iocfg-if1.0.4indirect
crates.iocfg_aliases0.2.1indirect
crates.ioclang-sys1.8.1indirect
crates.iocpp_demangle0.4.5indirect
crates.iocrc32fast1.5.0indirect
crates.ioeither1.15.0indirect
crates.ioequivalent1.0.2indirect
crates.ioerrno0.3.14indirect
crates.iofallible-iterator0.3.0indirect
crates.iofastrand2.3.0indirect
crates.ioflate21.1.9indirect
crates.iofutures-channel0.3.31indirect
crates.iofutures-core0.3.31indirect
crates.iofutures-executor0.3.31indirect
crates.iofutures-io0.3.31indirect
crates.iofutures-macro0.3.31indirect
crates.iofutures-sink0.3.31indirect
crates.iofutures-task0.3.31indirect
crates.iofutures-util0.3.31indirect
crates.iogimli0.32.3indirect
crates.ioglob0.3.3indirect
crates.iogoblin0.10.5indirect
crates.iohashbrown0.16.1indirect
crates.ioitertools0.13.0indirect
crates.iolazy_static1.5.0indirect
crates.iolibc0.2.180indirect
crates.iolibloading0.8.9indirect
crates.iolibproc0.14.11indirect
crates.iolinux-raw-sys0.11.0indirect
crates.iolog0.4.29indirect
crates.iomach0.3.2indirect
crates.iomach20.4.3indirect
crates.iomach_o_sys0.1.1indirect
crates.iomemchr2.8.0indirect
crates.iomemmap20.9.9indirect
crates.iominimal-lexical0.2.1indirect
crates.iominiz_oxide0.8.9indirect
crates.iomio1.1.1indirect
crates.ionix0.26.4indirect
crates.ionix0.31.1indirect
crates.ionom7.1.3indirect
crates.ioobject0.37.3indirect
crates.ioonce_cell1.21.3indirect
crates.iopin-project-lite0.2.16indirect
crates.iopin-utils0.1.0indirect
crates.ioplain0.2.3indirect
crates.ioprettyplease0.2.37indirect
crates.ioproc-macro21.0.106indirect
crates.ioproc-maps0.4.0indirect
crates.ioquote1.0.44indirect
crates.ioread-process-memory0.1.6indirect
crates.ioregex1.12.3indirect
crates.ioregex-automata0.4.14indirect
crates.ioregex-syntax0.8.9indirect
crates.ioremoteprocess0.5.1indirect
crates.iorustc-demangle0.1.27indirect
crates.iorustc-hash1.1.0indirect
crates.iorustc-hash2.1.1indirect
crates.iorustix1.1.3indirect
crates.ioruzstd0.8.2indirect
crates.ioscroll0.13.0indirect
crates.ioscroll_derive0.13.1indirect
crates.ioshlex1.3.0indirect
crates.iosignal-hook-registry1.4.8indirect
crates.iosimd-adler320.3.8indirect
crates.ioslab0.4.12indirect
crates.iosmallvec1.15.1indirect
crates.iostable_deref_trait1.2.1indirect
crates.iosyn2.0.115indirect
crates.iotempfile3.25.0indirect
crates.iotokio-macros2.6.0indirect
crates.iotracing-attributes0.1.31indirect
crates.iotracing-core0.1.36indirect
crates.iotwox-hash2.1.2indirect
crates.iotyped-arena2.0.2indirect
crates.iounicode-ident1.0.23indirect
crates.iowasi0.11.1+wasi-snapshot-preview1indirect
crates.iowinapi0.3.9indirect
crates.iowinapi-i686-pc-windows-gnu0.4.0indirect
crates.iowinapi-x86_64-pc-windows-gnu0.4.0indirect
crates.iowindows0.62.2indirect
crates.iowindows-collections0.3.2indirect
crates.iowindows-core0.62.2indirect
crates.iowindows-future0.3.2indirect
crates.iowindows-implement0.60.2indirect
crates.iowindows-interface0.59.3indirect
crates.iowindows-link0.2.1indirect
crates.iowindows-numerics0.3.1indirect
crates.iowindows-result0.4.1indirect
crates.iowindows-strings0.5.1indirect
crates.iowindows-sys0.61.2indirect
crates.iowindows-threading0.2.1indirect
Dependency advisories 3

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 106 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 3 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
anyhow1.0.101indirectunknown11.0.103
mach0.3.2indirectunknown1
memmap20.9.9indirectunknown10.9.11

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.

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 statisticscrates.io.