Public record
Software health reportschema 0.16.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-20 15:46 UTC

widefix / actual_db_schema

Keep DB schema in sync across branches effortlessly. Install and use rails db:migrate as normal. The gem handles the rest automatically.

RubyMIT★ 394 stars⑂ 19 forkssince Oct 2022View on GitHub ↗

widefix/actual_db_schema holds a health index of 65 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (72/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (35/100). It was last updated 35 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

65
overall / 100
Good

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.

65
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 60 is calibrated to 65 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

WideFixOrganization
9 followers27 public repossince Aug 2013

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
RubyGemsactual_db_schema0.9.2-2635 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

60Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recencylast push 35 days ago
7.6/36Commit cadence11/52 weeks with commits
10.8/18Commit volume15 commits in the last year
2/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained3 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
commits_last_year15
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push35
active_weeks_last_year11
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases12 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 35 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~59 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count12
latest_release_tagv0.9.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release35
mean_days_between_releases59
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?

63Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
42.1/60Stars394 stars
10.5/25Forks19 forks
0/15Watchers2 watchers
Inputs used
forks19
stars394
watchers2
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
60.4/80Total downloads653,001 downloads all-time across rubygems
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesactual_db_schema
dependents
ecosystemsrubygems
total_downloads653,001
monthly_downloads
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?

67Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
7.3/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 67% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth12 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled12
top_contributor_share0.674
How it's scored
27.8/42Issue resolution66% of issues closed
27.2/30PR acceptance88/97 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
7.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 16/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
merged_prs88
open_issues29
closed_issues57
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.663
closed_unmerged_prs9
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.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
7.2/25Owner reach9 followers of widefix
22.5/25Track record27 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers9
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginwidefix
public_repos27
account_age_days4,708
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on rubygems
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 35 days ago
20/20Version history26 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesactual_db_schema
ecosystemsrubygems
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish35

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

72Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.rubocop.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
6/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests8 out of 21 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://blog.widefix.com/actual-db-schema/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics3 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsdbschema, migrations, rails
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://blog.widefix.com/actual-db-schema/
docs_sitehttps://blog.widefix.com/actual-db-schema/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

38Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
0.8/2.5CI-Tests8 out of 21 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 3
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3.8/7.5Code-ReviewFound 16/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
0.8/2.5Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
1.5/7.5Maintained3 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
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
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities93 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate3.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
13/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories2 affected: activesupport 7.1.1 (high 7.5), activerecord 7.1.1 (moderate)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
31.7/40No advisories left outstanding2 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 340 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories94
affected_packages18
assessed_packages75
unassessed_packages10
affected_by_severitycritical 2, high 9, moderate 5, low 2
direct_affected_packages2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 75 resolved dependencies against OSV. 10 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.

35Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config.rubocop.yml
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentDockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
0/8Automated maintenanceno data
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesGemfile.lock
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codeRuby without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/67 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRuby
largest_source_bytes17,612
source_files_sampled67
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

394GitHub stars
12contributors
15commits, last 12 months
35days since last push
12releases
1bus factor
29open issues
RubyGemspackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.1 / 10
3.1aggregate

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).Scorecard v5.5.0 · 2026-07-20 15:46 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal 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
3CI-Tests8 out of 21 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 3
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
5Code-ReviewFound 16/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
2Maintained3 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities93 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 5
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
RubyGemsactiverecord~> 7.1.0Gemfile
RubyGemsactivesupport~> 7.1.0Gemfile
RubyGemsminitest~> 5.0Gemfile
RubyGemsrakeGemfile
RubyGemsrubocop~> 1.21Gemfile
All dependencies 85

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 7 direct and 78 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
RubyGemsactiverecorddirect
RubyGemsactiverecord7.1.1direct
RubyGemsactivesupportdirect
RubyGemsactivesupport7.1.1direct
RubyGemsminitest5.20.0direct
RubyGemsrake13.1.0direct
RubyGemsrubocop1.57.2direct
RubyGemsactioncable7.1.1indirect
RubyGemsactionmailbox7.1.1indirect
RubyGemsactionmailer7.1.1indirect
RubyGemsactionpack7.1.1indirect
RubyGemsactiontext7.1.1indirect
RubyGemsactionview7.1.1indirect
RubyGemsactivejob7.1.1indirect
RubyGemsactivemodel7.1.1indirect
RubyGemsactivestorage7.1.1indirect
RubyGemsappraisalindirect
RubyGemsappraisal2.5.0indirect
RubyGemsastindirect
RubyGemsast2.4.2indirect
RubyGemsbase640.1.1indirect
RubyGemsbigdecimal3.1.4indirect
RubyGemsbuilder3.2.4indirect
RubyGemsconcurrent-ruby1.2.2indirect
RubyGemsconnection_pool2.4.1indirect
RubyGemscrass1.0.6indirect
RubyGemscsvindirect
RubyGemscsv3.3.5indirect
RubyGemsdate3.3.3indirect
RubyGemsdebugindirect
RubyGemsdebug1.8.0indirect
RubyGemsdrb2.1.1indirect
RubyGemserubi1.12.0indirect
RubyGemsglobalid1.2.1indirect
RubyGemsi18n1.14.1indirect
RubyGemsio-console0.6.0indirect
RubyGemsirb1.8.3indirect
RubyGemsjson2.6.3indirect
RubyGemslanguage_server-protocol3.17.0.3indirect
RubyGemsloofah2.21.4indirect
RubyGemsmail2.8.1indirect
RubyGemsmarcel1.0.2indirect
RubyGemsmini_mime1.1.5indirect
RubyGemsmutex_m0.1.2indirect
RubyGemsnet-imap0.4.4indirect
RubyGemsnet-pop0.1.2indirect
RubyGemsnet-protocol0.2.1indirect
RubyGemsnet-smtp0.4.0indirect
RubyGemsnio4r2.5.9indirect
RubyGemsnokogiri1.15.4indirect
RubyGemsparallel1.23.0indirect
RubyGemsparserindirect
RubyGemsparser3.2.2.4indirect
RubyGemsprismindirect
RubyGemsprism1.9.0indirect
RubyGemspsych5.1.1.1indirect
RubyGemsracc1.7.3indirect
RubyGemsrack3.0.8indirect
RubyGemsrack-session2.0.0indirect
RubyGemsrack-test2.1.0indirect
RubyGemsrackup2.1.0indirect
RubyGemsrailsindirect
RubyGemsrails7.1.1indirect
RubyGemsrails-dom-testing2.2.0indirect
RubyGemsrails-html-sanitizer1.6.0indirect
RubyGemsrailties7.1.1indirect
RubyGemsrainbow3.1.1indirect
RubyGemsrdoc6.5.0indirect
RubyGemsregexp_parser2.8.2indirect
RubyGemsreline0.3.9indirect
RubyGemsrexml3.2.6indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-ast1.30.0indirect
RubyGemsruby-progressbar1.13.0indirect
RubyGemsruby2_keywords0.0.5indirect
RubyGemssqlite3indirect
RubyGemssqlite31.6.8indirect
RubyGemsstringio3.0.8indirect
RubyGemsthor1.3.0indirect
RubyGemstimeout0.4.0indirect
RubyGemstzinfo2.0.6indirect
RubyGemsunicode-display_width2.5.0indirect
RubyGemswebrick1.8.1indirect
RubyGemswebsocket-driver0.7.6indirect
RubyGemswebsocket-extensions0.1.5indirect
RubyGemszeitwerk2.6.12indirect
Dependency advisories 18

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 75 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 18 carry known advisories, of which 2 are direct. 10 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
activestorage7.1.1indirectcritical68.1.2.1
rack-session2.0.0indirectcritical22.1.2
activesupport7.1.1directhigh38.1.2.1
actionmailer7.1.1indirecthigh17.2.1.1
actionpack7.1.1indirecthigh68.0.0.1
actiontext7.1.1indirecthigh37.2.1.1
concurrent-ruby1.2.2indirecthigh31.3.7
nokogiri1.15.4indirecthigh171.19.4
rack3.0.8indirecthigh233.2.6
rexml3.2.6indirecthigh63.3.9
webrick1.8.1indirecthigh21.8.2
activerecord7.1.1directmoderate18.0.2.1
net-imap0.4.4indirectmoderate100.6.4.1
rails7.1.1indirectmoderate17.1.3.1
rdoc6.5.0indirectmoderate16.6.3.1
websocket-driver0.7.6indirectmoderate30.8.1
actionview7.1.1indirectlow18.1.2.1
rails-html-sanitizer1.6.0indirectlow51.6.1

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.

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 v0.16.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticsRubyGems.