Public record
Software health reportschema 0.27.0 · metrics 2.5.0 · 2026-08-01 07:05 UTC

wim-web / tnnl

GoMIT★ 0 stars⑂ 1 forksince Apr 2024View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolhow this is determined

wim-web/tnnl holds a health index of 59 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Vitality (80/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (24/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

59
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.

59
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 56 is calibrated to 59 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

wimPersonal account
7 followers43 public repossince Dec 2018

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Gogithub.com/wim-web/tnnlv0.6.21-311 day ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

80Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
10.4/36Commit cadence — 15/52 weeks with commits
17.8/18Commit volume — 95 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year95
human_commit_share0.16
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year15
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 30 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 1 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~5.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count30
latest_release_tagv0.6.21
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release1
mean_days_between_releases5.2

Community & Adoption

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

24At Risk · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars — 0 stars
0/25Forks — 1 forks
0/15Watchers — 1 watchers
Inputs used
forks1
stars0
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code 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_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

43Weak · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 1 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — 0% of issues closed
26.2/30PR acceptance — 124/142 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs124
open_issues1
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0
closed_unmerged_prs18
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
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
6.5/25Owner reach — 7 followers of wim-web
24/25Track record — 43 public repos, account ~7 yr old
Inputs used
followers7
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginwim-web
public_repos43
account_age_days2,794
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on go
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 1 days ago
20/20Version history — 31 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesgithub.com/wim-web/tnnl
ecosystemsgo
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish1

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

67Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 26 out of 26 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
0/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikiyes
homepage
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionno

Security

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

66Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 26 out of 26 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
5/5Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
7.5/7.5Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate5.8
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): packaging. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages39
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
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 39 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
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — no data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
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
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — go.mod (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — Go (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
2/10Demonstrated agent practice — 1 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 84 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesgo.sum
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0.01
toolchain_manifestsgo.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share0.84
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Go (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/58 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageGo
largest_source_bytes23,971
source_files_sampled58
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

0GitHub stars
1contributors
95commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
30releases
1bus factor
1open issues
Gopackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.8 / 10
5.8aggregate

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 · 2026-08-01 07:04 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests26 out of 26 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 0/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 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
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 8
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Gocharm.land/bubbles/v2v2.1.1go.mod
Gocharm.land/bubbletea/v2v2.0.8go.mod
Gocharm.land/lipgloss/v2v2.0.5go.mod
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2v1.43.2go.mod
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/configv1.32.33go.mod
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/ecsv1.89.2go.mod
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/ssmv1.73.2go.mod
Gogithub.com/spf13/cobrav1.10.2go.mod
All dependencies 39

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 8 direct and 31 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Gocharm.land/bubbles/v2v2.1.1direct
Gocharm.land/bubbletea/v2v2.0.8direct
Gocharm.land/lipgloss/v2v2.0.5direct
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2v1.43.2direct
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/configv1.32.33direct
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/ecsv1.89.2direct
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/ssmv1.73.2direct
Gogithub.com/spf13/cobrav1.10.2direct
Gogithub.com/atotto/clipboardv0.1.4indirect
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/credentialsv1.19.32indirect
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/feature/ec2/imdsv1.18.33indirect
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/internal/configsourcesv1.4.33indirect
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/internal/endpoints/v2v2.7.33indirect
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/internal/v4av1.4.34indirect
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/internal/accept-encodingv1.13.14indirect
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/internal/presigned-urlv1.13.33indirect
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/signinv1.5.2indirect
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/ssov1.33.2indirect
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/ssooidcv1.38.2indirect
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/stsv1.45.2indirect
Gogithub.com/aws/smithy-gov1.27.5indirect
Gogithub.com/charmbracelet/colorprofilev0.4.3indirect
Gogithub.com/charmbracelet/ultravioletv0.0.0-20260703014108-f5a850f9c2b7indirect
Gogithub.com/charmbracelet/x/ansiv0.11.7indirect
Gogithub.com/charmbracelet/x/termv0.2.2indirect
Gogithub.com/charmbracelet/x/termiosv0.1.1indirect
Gogithub.com/charmbracelet/x/windowsv0.2.2indirect
Gogithub.com/clipperhouse/displaywidthv0.11.0indirect
Gogithub.com/clipperhouse/uax29/v2v2.7.0indirect
Gogithub.com/inconshreveable/mousetrapv1.1.0indirect
Gogithub.com/lucasb-eyer/go-colorfulv1.4.0indirect
Gogithub.com/mattn/go-runewidthv0.0.24indirect
Gogithub.com/muesli/cancelreaderv0.2.2indirect
Gogithub.com/rivo/unisegv0.4.7indirect
Gogithub.com/sahilm/fuzzyv0.1.3indirect
Gogithub.com/spf13/pflagv1.0.9indirect
Gogithub.com/xo/terminfov0.0.0-20220910002029-abceb7e1c41eindirect
Gogolang.org/x/syncv0.22.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/sysv0.46.0indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 39 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

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

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 v2.5.0, schema v0.27.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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