Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-04 21:04 UTC

wooorm / import-meta-resolve

Resolve things like Node.js — ponyfill for `import.meta.resolve`

JavaScriptCustom license★ 145 stars⑂ 17 forkssince May 2021View on GitHub ↗

wooorm/import-meta-resolve holds a health index of 48 out of 100, placing it in the Weak band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (65/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (31/100). It was last updated 340 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

48
overall / 100
Weak

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.

48
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 49 is calibrated to 48 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

TitusPersonal account
3,554 followers183 public repossince Jul 2011@igalia

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 publishTags
npmimport-meta-resolve4.2.093,106,06319340 days agoesmmodulenoderesolve

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

34At Risk · 21% of overall
How it's scored
3.6/36Push recencylast push 340 days ago
0.7/36Commit cadence1/52 weeks with commits
10.3/18Commit volume13 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year13
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push340
active_weeks_last_year1
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases18 releases published
16.2/36Release recencylatest release 340 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~123.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count18
latest_release_tag4.2.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release340
mean_days_between_releases123.4
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?

59Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
35/60Stars145 stars
10/25Forks17 forks
1.7/15Watchers3 watchers
Inputs used
forks17
stars145
watchers3
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_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads93,106,063 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesimport-meta-resolve
dependents
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads
monthly_downloads93,106,063
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?

65Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
1.9/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 92% of commits
12.2/13.5Contributor breadth9 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 15 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled9
top_contributor_share0.916
How it's scored
40.2/42Issue resolution96% of issues closed
21.8/30PR acceptance8/11 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
1.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 3/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
merged_prs8
open_issues1
closed_issues22
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.957
closed_unmerged_prs3
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
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
25/25Owner reach3,554 followers of wooorm
25/25Track record183 public repos, account ~15 yr old
Inputs used
followers3,554
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginwooorm
public_repos183
account_age_days5,486
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on npm
26/35Publish recencylatest publish 340 days ago
20/20Version history19 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesimport-meta-resolve
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish340

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

56Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
6/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests1 out of 3 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics4 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsresolve, node, esm, module
has_wikino
homepage
docs_site
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

34At Risk · 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
0.8/2.5CI-Tests1 out of 3 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
0.8/7.5Code-ReviewFound 3/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 15 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.2/2.5Licenselicense file detected
0/7.5Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
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
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate3.4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, 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.

31At Risk · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
3.9/40Legible commit history7 of 95 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.074
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingtsconfig.json
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 95
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configstsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable codeJavaScript with type-check config (tsconfig.json)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/11 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes34,732
source_files_sampled11
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

145GitHub stars
9contributors
13commits, last 12 months
340days since last push
18releases
1bus factor
1open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 17 ⇿
0Stars
17Forks
14Releases

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.

0481216201712021-072023-102025-12
Major 3Minor 5Patch 6

Each point covers 5 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.4 / 10
3.4aggregate

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 · 2026-08-04 21:04 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
3CI-Tests1 out of 3 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 3
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1Code-ReviewFound 3/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
10Contributorsproject has 15 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
9Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
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
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 11

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 11 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@types/node^24.0.0indirect
npm@types/semver^7.0.0indirect
npmc8^10.0.0indirect
npmf-ck^2.0.0indirect
npmprettier^3.0.0indirect
npmremark-cli^12.0.0indirect
npmremark-preset-wooorm^11.0.0indirect
npmsemver^7.0.0indirect
npmtype-coverage^2.0.0indirect
npmtypescript^5.0.0indirect
npmxo^1.0.0indirect
Dependency advisories not assessed

Advisory matching could not run for this report: No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

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 v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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