Public record
Software health reportschema 0.11.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-15 23:57 UTC

yarpc / yarpc-go

A message passing platform for Go

GoMIT★ 439 stars⑂ 126 forkssince Jan 2016View on GitHub ↗

yarpc/yarpc-go holds a health index of 83 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (86/100) and lowest on Security (46/100). It was last updated today. 4 contributors account for most of its recent work.

83
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.

83
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 70 is calibrated to 83 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

yarpcOrganization
18 followers4 public repossince Jan 2016

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Gogo.uber.org/yarpcv1.89.0-1762 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

86Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
15.9/36Commit cadence23/52 weeks with commits
14.6/18Commit volume41 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained20 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year41
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year23

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases100 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 2 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~13.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv1.89.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release2
mean_days_between_releases13.9
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?

79Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
42.8/60Stars439 stars
17.5/25Forks126 forks
7.6/15Watchers24 watchers
Inputs used
forks126
stars439
watchers24
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateyes

Sustainability & Governance

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

86Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
43.2/54Bus factor4 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
17/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 24% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth87 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 28 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor4
contributors_sampled87
top_contributor_share0.244
How it's scored
40.7/42Issue resolution97% of issues closed
24.3/30PR acceptance1,707/2,104 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
15/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
Inputs used
merged_prs1,707
open_issues11
closed_issues358
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.97
closed_unmerged_prs397
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
9.2/25Owner reach18 followers of yarpc
17.1/25Track record4 public repos, account ~10 yr old
Inputs used
followers18
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginyarpc
public_repos4
account_age_days3,843
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 go
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 2 days ago
20/20Version history176 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesgo.uber.org/yarpc
ecosystemsgo
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish2

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

46Weak · 19% of overall
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics8 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsgo, message-passing, rpc, grpc, protobuf, thrift, yarpc, microservices
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?

46Weak · 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-Tests30 out of 30 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
7.5/7.5Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 28 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained20 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
1/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
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-Permissionsno data
0/7.5Vulnerabilities19 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated13
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive5
scorecard_aggregate4.6
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. 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.

61Moderate · 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
18/18One-command bootstrapMakefile, internal/examples/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingGo (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentDockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
0/8Automated maintenanceno data
2/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesgo.sum
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesMakefile, internal/examples/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
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
45/45Type-checkable codeGo (statically typed)
54.3/55Manageable file sizes11/879 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageGo
largest_source_bytes624,530
source_files_sampled879
oversized_source_files11
How it's scored
40/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)encoding/protobuf/internal/testpb/test.proto, encoding/protobuf/internal/testpb/v2/test.proto, internal/crossdock/crossdockpb/crossdock.proto, internal/examples/protobuf/examplepb/example.proto, internal/examples/streaming/stream.proto, internal/prototest/examplepb/example.proto, x/reflection/testdata/conflict_extension.proto, x/reflection/testdata/conflict_message.proto, x/reflection/testdata/conflict_message_extension.proto, x/reflection/testdata/conflict_message_nest.proto, x/reflection/testdata/conflict_service.proto, x/reflection/testdata/conflict_service_method.proto, x/reflection/testdata/main.proto, x/reflection/testdata/other.proto, x/reflection/testdata/otherroot/main.proto
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplesexample, examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexample, examples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_filesencoding/protobuf/internal/testpb/test.proto, encoding/protobuf/internal/testpb/v2/test.proto, internal/crossdock/crossdockpb/crossdock.proto, internal/examples/protobuf/examplepb/example.proto, internal/examples/streaming/stream.proto, internal/prototest/examplepb/example.proto, x/reflection/testdata/conflict_extension.proto, x/reflection/testdata/conflict_message.proto, x/reflection/testdata/conflict_message_extension.proto, x/reflection/testdata/conflict_message_nest.proto, x/reflection/testdata/conflict_service.proto, x/reflection/testdata/conflict_service_method.proto, x/reflection/testdata/main.proto, x/reflection/testdata/other.proto, x/reflection/testdata/otherroot/main.proto
interfaces_expected_of
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

439GitHub stars
87contributors
41commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
100releases
4bus factor
11open issues
Gopackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.6 / 10
4.6aggregate

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 · 2026-07-15 23:56 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-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
10Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
10Contributorsproject has 28 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained20 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
2Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
0Vulnerabilities19 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 34
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Gogithub.com/dgryski/go-farmv0.0.0-20200201041132-a6ae2369ad13go.mod
Gogithub.com/gogo/googleapisv1.4.1go.mod
Gogithub.com/gogo/protobufv1.3.2go.mod
Gogithub.com/gogo/statusv1.1.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/golang/mockv1.7.0-rc.1go.mod
Gogithub.com/golang/protobufv1.5.4go.mod
Gogithub.com/golang/snappyv0.0.4go.mod
Gogithub.com/kisielk/errcheckv1.7.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/klauspost/compressv1.18.4go.mod
Gogithub.com/mattn/go-shellwordsv1.0.12go.mod
Gogithub.com/opentracing/opentracing-gov1.2.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/stretchr/testifyv1.9.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/uber-go/mapdecodev1.0.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/uber-go/tallyv3.5.8+incompatiblego.mod
Gogithub.com/uber/jaeger-client-gov2.30.0+incompatiblego.mod
Gogithub.com/uber/ringpop-gov0.8.5go.mod
Gogithub.com/uber/tchannel-gov1.34.4go.mod
Gogo.uber.org/atomicv1.11.0go.mod
Gogo.uber.org/fxv1.22.0go.mod
Gogo.uber.org/goleakv1.3.0go.mod
Gogo.uber.org/multierrv1.11.0go.mod
Gogo.uber.org/net/metricsv1.4.0go.mod
Gogo.uber.org/thriftrwv1.32.0go.mod
Gogo.uber.org/toolsv0.0.0-20190618225709-2cfd321de3eego.mod
Gogo.uber.org/yarpc/internal/examplesv0.0.0-20230831212929-ccef8c01afa8go.mod
Gogo.uber.org/zapv1.27.0go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/lintv0.0.0-20210508222113-6edffad5e616go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/netv0.28.0go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/toolsv0.22.0go.mod
Gogoogle.golang.org/genproto/googleapis/rpcv0.0.0-20240814211410-ddb44dafa142go.mod
Gogoogle.golang.org/grpcv1.67.3go.mod
Gogoogle.golang.org/protobufv1.34.2go.mod
Gogopkg.in/yaml.v2v2.4.0go.mod
Gohonnef.co/go/toolsv0.4.3go.mod
All dependencies 78

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 46 direct and 32 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Gogithub.com/dgryski/go-farmv0.0.0-20200201041132-a6ae2369ad13direct
Gogithub.com/gogo/googleapisv1.4.1direct
Gogithub.com/gogo/protobuf1.3.1direct
Gogithub.com/gogo/protobufv1.3.2direct
Gogithub.com/gogo/statusv1.1.0direct
Gogithub.com/golang/mock1.4.0direct
Gogithub.com/golang/mockv1.7.0-rc.1direct
Gogithub.com/golang/protobufv1.5.4direct
Gogithub.com/golang/snappyv0.0.4direct
Gogithub.com/kisielk/errcheckv1.7.0direct
Gogithub.com/klauspost/compressv1.18.4direct
Gogithub.com/mattn/go-shellwordsv1.0.12direct
Gogithub.com/opentracing/opentracing-go1.1.0direct
Gogithub.com/opentracing/opentracing-gov1.2.0direct
Gogithub.com/stretchr/testify1.4.0direct
Gogithub.com/stretchr/testifyv1.9.0direct
Gogithub.com/uber-go/mapdecodev1.0.0direct
Gogithub.com/uber-go/tallyv3.5.8+incompatibledirect
Gogithub.com/uber/jaeger-client-go2.22.1+incompatibledirect
Gogithub.com/uber/jaeger-client-gov2.30.0+incompatibledirect
Gogithub.com/uber/ringpop-gov0.8.5direct
Gogithub.com/uber/tchannel-go1.16.0direct
Gogithub.com/uber/tchannel-gov1.34.4direct
Gogo.uber.org/atomicv1.11.0direct
Gogo.uber.org/fx1.10.0direct
Gogo.uber.org/fxv1.22.0direct
Gogo.uber.org/goleakv1.3.0direct
Gogo.uber.org/multierr1.4.0direct
Gogo.uber.org/multierrv1.11.0direct
Gogo.uber.org/net/metricsv1.4.0direct
Gogo.uber.org/thriftrw1.22.0direct
Gogo.uber.org/thriftrwv1.32.0direct
Gogo.uber.org/toolsv0.0.0-20190618225709-2cfd321de3eedirect
Gogo.uber.org/yarpc/internal/examplesv0.0.0-20230831212929-ccef8c01afa8direct
Gogo.uber.org/zap1.13.0direct
Gogo.uber.org/zapv1.27.0direct
Gogolang.org/x/lintv0.0.0-20210508222113-6edffad5e616direct
Gogolang.org/x/net0.0.0-20200202094626-16171245cfb2direct
Gogolang.org/x/netv0.28.0direct
Gogolang.org/x/toolsv0.22.0direct
Gogoogle.golang.org/genproto/googleapis/rpcv0.0.0-20240814211410-ddb44dafa142direct
Gogoogle.golang.org/grpc1.27.1direct
Gogoogle.golang.org/grpcv1.67.3direct
Gogoogle.golang.org/protobufv1.34.2direct
Gogopkg.in/yaml.v2v2.4.0direct
Gohonnef.co/go/toolsv0.4.3direct
Go../..1.42.1indirect
Gogithub.com/anmitsu/go-shlexv0.0.0-20200514113438-38f4b401e2beindirect
Gogithub.com/apache/thrift0.0.0-20161221203622-b2a4d4ae21c7indirect
Gogithub.com/apache/thrift0.13.0indirect
Gogithub.com/beorn7/perksv1.0.1indirect
Gogithub.com/burntsushi/tomlv1.2.1indirect
Gogithub.com/cactus/go-statsd-client/statsdv0.0.0-20191106001114-12b4e2b38748indirect
Gogithub.com/cespare/xxhash/v2v2.3.0indirect
Gogithub.com/crossdock/crossdock-go0.0.0-20160816171116-049aabb0122bindirect
Gogithub.com/davecgh/go-spewv1.1.1indirect
Gogithub.com/fatih/structtagv1.2.0indirect
Gogithub.com/jessevdk/go-flagsv1.5.0indirect
Gogithub.com/konsorten/go-windows-terminal-sequencesv1.0.2indirect
Gogithub.com/matttproud/golang_protobuf_extensionsv1.0.2-0.20181231171920-c182affec369indirect
Gogithub.com/pmezard/go-difflibv1.0.0indirect
Gogithub.com/prometheus/client_golangv1.4.1indirect
Gogithub.com/prometheus/client_modelv0.2.0indirect
Gogithub.com/prometheus/commonv0.9.1indirect
Gogithub.com/prometheus/procfsv0.0.9indirect
Gogithub.com/samuel/go-thriftv0.0.0-20191111193933-5165175b40afindirect
Gogithub.com/sirupsen/logrusv1.4.2indirect
Gogithub.com/twmb/murmur3v1.1.8indirect
Gogithub.com/uber-common/barkv1.2.1indirect
Gogithub.com/uber/jaeger-libv2.4.1+incompatibleindirect
Gogo.uber.org/digv1.17.1indirect
Gogo.uber.org/yarpc1.42.1indirect
Gogolang.org/x/exp/typeparamsv0.0.0-20221208152030-732eee02a75aindirect
Gogolang.org/x/modv0.18.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/syncv0.8.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/sysv0.28.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/textv0.17.0indirect
Gogopkg.in/yaml.v3v3.0.1indirect
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 v0.11.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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