Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-20 07:14 UTC

wmixvideo / nfe

Nota Fiscal Eletrônica em Java.

JavaApache-2.0★ 764 stars⑂ 410 forkssince Jul 2013View on GitHub ↗

wmixvideo/nfe holds a health index of 89 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (88/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (53/100). It was last updated 5 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

89
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.

89
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 75 is calibrated to 89 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Wmix Distribuidora LtdaOrganization · verified domain
46 followers8 public repossince Jan 2014

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Mavencom.github.wmixvideo:nfe5.1.2-26911 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

88Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 5 days ago
22.2/36Commit cadence32/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume264 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year264
human_commit_share0.95
days_since_last_push5
active_weeks_last_year32
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases100 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 11 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~5.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv5.1.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release11
mean_days_between_releases5.2

Community & Adoption

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

66Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
46.8/60Stars764 stars
21.8/25Forks410 forks
11.7/15Watchers130 watchers
Inputs used
forks410
stars764
watchers130
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (Apache-2.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges4
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicescoveralls.io, github.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

79Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
15.1/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 33% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth94 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 15 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled94
top_contributor_share0.331
How it's scored
41.7/42Issue resolution99% of issues closed
23.4/30PR acceptance618/794 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
3/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 6/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
merged_prs618
open_issues2
closed_issues359
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d2
prs_merged_30d2
prs_decided_30d6
issue_closed_ratio0.994
closed_unmerged_prs176
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
20/20Verified domain
12/25Owner reach46 followers of wmixvideo
18.9/25Track record8 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers46
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginwmixvideo
public_repos8
account_age_days4,621

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on maven
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 11 days ago
20/20Version history269 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagescom.github.wmixvideo:nfe
ecosystemsmaven
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish11

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

71Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests8 out of 8 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
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics5 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsnfe, sefaz, java, cte, mdfe
has_wikino
homepage
docs_site
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

69Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests8 out of 8 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
1.5/7.5Code-ReviewFound 6/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 15 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
5/5SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate6.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriesno indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages13
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the maven:com.github.wmixvideo:nfe@5.1.2 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 13 packages. 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.

53Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
14/40Legible commit history25 of 95 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.263
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrappom.xml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingJava (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
10/10Demonstrated agent practice7 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance5 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0.07
toolchain_manifestspom.xml
dependency_bot_commit_share0.05
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeJava (statically typed)
54.7/55Manageable file sizes12/2,178 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJava
largest_source_bytes110,079
source_files_sampled2,178
oversized_source_files12

Key facts

764GitHub stars
94contributors
264commits, last 12 months
5days since last push
100releases
2bus factor
2open issues
Mavenpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 410 ⇿
0Stars
410Forks
100Releases

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.

010020030040039872015-012020-112026-09
Major 1Minor 1Patch 97

Each point covers 11 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.1 / 10
6.1aggregate

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 · 2026-09-20 07:14 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
10CI-Tests8 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2Code-ReviewFound 6/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
10Contributorsproject has 15 contributing companies or organizations
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
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 6
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Mavenorg.apache.santuario:xmlsec4.0.2pom.xml
Mavenorg.simpleframework:simple-xml${simple-xml.version}pom.xml
Mavenorg.apache.commons:commons-lang3${commons-lang3.version}pom.xml
Mavenorg.apache.httpcomponents.client5:httpclient5${httpclient5.version}pom.xml
Mavenorg.slf4j:slf4j-api${slf4j.version}pom.xml
Mavenjavax.xml.bind:jaxb-api2.3.1pom.xml
All dependencies 18

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 6 direct and 12 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Mavenjavax.xml.bind:jaxb-api2.3.1direct
Mavenorg.apache.commons:commons-lang33.20.0direct
Mavenorg.apache.httpcomponents.client5:httpclient55.6.4direct
Mavenorg.apache.santuario:xmlsec4.0.2direct
Mavenorg.simpleframework:simple-xml2.7.1direct
Mavenorg.slf4j:slf4j-api2.0.18direct
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-compiler-plugin3.16.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-gpg-plugin3.2.4indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-javadoc-plugin3.12.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-release-plugin3.3.1indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-source-plugin3.4.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-surefire-plugin3.5.6indirect
Mavenorg.eluder.coveralls:coveralls-maven-plugin4.3.0indirect
Mavenorg.jacoco:jacoco-maven-plugin0.8.15indirect
Mavenorg.junit.jupiter:junit-jupiter6.1.3indirect
Mavenorg.owasp:dependency-check-maven13.0.0indirect
Mavenorg.slf4j:slf4j-simple2.0.18indirect
Mavenorg.sonatype.plugins:nexus-staging-maven-plugin1.7.0indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing maven:com.github.wmixvideo:nfe@5.1.2 pulls in 13 packages, direct and transitive: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct dependencies.

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

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 statisticsMaven.