Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-20 02:39 UTC

yukinarit / pyserde

Yet another serialization library on top of dataclasses, inspired by serde-rs.

PythonMIT★ 851 stars⑂ 63 forkssince Dec 2018View on GitHub ↗

KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

#dataclasses #serialization #python #msgpack #json #yaml #toml #typing #serde

yukinarit/pyserde holds a health index of 34 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (94/100) and lowest on Security (35/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

overall / 100

At Risk

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.

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)

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 74 is calibrated to 88 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02). High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy applies a 50% multiplier to weighted overall health and gives it an At Risk ceiling of 34.

Ownership

yukiPersonal account

176 followers40 public repossince Sep 2012

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

Package ecosystems

Registry	Package	Version	Downloads / mo	Versions	Last publish
PyPI	pyserde	0.33.1	939,883	118	0 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

91Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

85Excellent

How it's scored

36/36	Push recency — last push 0 days ago
20.8/36	Commit cadence — 30/52 weeks with commits
18/18	Commit volume — 105 commits in the last year
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

commits_last_year	105
human_commit_share	0.63
days_since_last_push	0
active_weeks_last_year	30

Release discipline

100Exceptional

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 96 releases published
36/36	Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27	Release cadence — a release every ~11.5 days
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data

Inputs used

releases_count	96
latest_release_tag	v0.33.1
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	0
mean_days_between_releases	11.5

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?

76Good · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

67Good

How it's scored

47.5/60	Stars — 851 stars
14.9/25	Forks — 63 forks
4.7/15	Watchers — 8 watchers

Inputs used

forks	63
stars	851
watchers	8
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

70Good

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
22.5/22.5	License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18	CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5	Code of conduct
0/7.2	Issue template
0/6.3	PR template

Inputs used

has_readme	yes
has_license	yes
readme_badges	3
has_contributing	yes
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	no
readme_badge_services	github.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_template	no

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

99Exceptional

How it's scored

79.6/80	Monthly downloads — 939,883 downloads/month across pypi
0/20	Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem

Inputs used

packages	pyserde
dependents	—
ecosystems	pypi
total_downloads	—
monthly_downloads	939,883
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?

69Good · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

38Weak

How it's scored

9/54	Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
5.1/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 77% of commits
13.5/13.5	Contributor breadth — 47 contributors
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 22 contributing companies or organizations

Inputs used

bus_factor	1
contributors_sampled	47
top_contributor_share	0.772

Issue & PR responsiveness

89Excellent

How it's scored

39.1/42	Issue resolution — 93% of issues closed
27.4/30	PR acceptance — 500/548 decided PRs merged
0/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
10.5/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 12/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7

Inputs used

merged_prs	500
open_issues	16
closed_issues	212
prs_merged_7d	6
prs_decided_7d	6
prs_merged_30d	7
prs_decided_30d	7
issue_closed_ratio	0.93
closed_unmerged_prs	48
first_time_authors_30d	0
first_time_prs_merged_30d	0
first_time_prs_decided_30d	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

62Moderate

How it's scored

10/30	Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20	Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
16.2/25	Owner reach — 176 followers of yukinarit
23.7/25	Track record — 40 public repos, account ~14 yr old

Inputs used

followers	176
owner_type	User
is_verified	—
owner_login	yukinarit
public_repos	40
account_age_days	5,118

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional

How it's scored

25/25	Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35	Publish recency — latest publish 0 days ago
20/20	Version history — 118 published versions
20/20	Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked

Inputs used

packages	pyserde
ecosystems	pypi
any_deprecated	no
min_days_since_publish	0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

94Exceptional · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

90Excellent

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 4 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
16/16	Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.black]), setup.cfg ([flake8], [pycodestyle])
9.6/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4	.editorconfig
16/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 26 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8

Inputs used

has_ci	yes
has_tests	yes
has_editorconfig	no
has_linter_config	yes
has_precommit_config	yes

Documentation

100Exceptional

How it's scored

30/30	README
25/25	Documentation directory
15/15	Documentation / homepage site — https://yukinarit.github.io/pyserde
10/10	Repository description
10/10	Topics — 9 topics
10/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	dataclasses, serialization, python, msgpack, json, yaml, toml, typing, serde
has_wiki	yes
homepage	https://yukinarit.github.io/pyserde
docs_site	https://yukinarit.github.io/pyserde
has_readme	yes
has_docs_dir	yes
has_description	yes

Security

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

35Weak · 16% of overall

Security posture

30At Risk

Jurisdiction risk alert

High-risk jurisdiction exposure detected

2 contributor organization profilesRussia1 top contributor profilesRussia

Based on self-published public profile locations. This governance signal does not determine nationality, citizenship, intent, sanctions status, or individual trustworthiness.

How jurisdiction exposure is assessed

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5	Branch-Protection — no data
2/2.5	CI-Tests — 26 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
5.2/7.5	Code-Review — Found 12/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
2.5/2.5	Contributors — project has 22 contributing companies or organizations
10/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5	Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5	Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5	License — license file detected
7.5/7.5	Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5	Packaging — no data
0/5	Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5	SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5	Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5	Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5	Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
5.2/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 3 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	15
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	3
scorecard_aggregate	5.9
high_risk_jurisdiction_cap	34
high_risk_jurisdiction_multiplier	50
security_posture_after_multiplier	30
security_posture_before_jurisdiction	59

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized. High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy applies a 50% multiplier and gives Security posture an At risk ceiling of 34.

Dependency advisories

55Moderate

How it's scored

11.9/35	Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 2 affected: click 8.3.1 (high 7.2), numpy 1.17.2 (high 7.5)
0/25	Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
29.3/40	No advisories left outstanding — 2 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 1,737 days ago

Inputs used

source	osv
advisories	15
affected_packages	5
assessed_packages	122
unassessed_packages	27
affected_by_severity	critical 1, high 3, low 1
direct_affected_packages	2

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 122 resolved dependencies against OSV. 27 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.

75Good · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

40Weak

How it's scored

0/45	Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40	Legible commit history — 63 of 63 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	no
llms_txt_url	—
legible_history_share	1
agent_instruction_files	—
agent_instruction_max_bytes	—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

90Excellent

How it's scored

18/18	One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22	Automated tests
11/11	Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.black]), setup.cfg ([flake8], [pycodestyle])
11/11	Static type checking — serde/py.typed
10/10	Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
10/10	Demonstrated agent practice — 7 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8	Automated maintenance — 37 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

has_nix	no
has_tests	yes
lockfiles	uv.lock
has_dockerfile	yes
typed_language	no
bootstrap_files	Makefile
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	yes
typecheck_configs	serde/py.typed
agent_commit_share	0.07
toolchain_manifests	—
dependency_bot_commit_share	0.37

Code legibility for models

82Excellent

How it's scored

27/45	Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (serde/py.typed)
55/55	Manageable file sizes — 0/137 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	Python
largest_source_bytes	59,246
source_files_sampled	137
oversized_source_files	0

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional

How it's scored

40/40	API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — examples/swagger.yml
0/20	MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40	Runnable examples — examples

Inputs used

example_dirs	examples
has_mcp_signal	no
api_schema_files	examples/swagger.yml
interfaces_expected_of	—

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

851GitHub stars

47contributors

105commits, last 12 months

0days since last push

96releases

1bus factor

16open issues

PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
Could not fetch pypi package 'pyserde_bench' from its registry
deps.dev does not index pypi:pyserde@0.33.1; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 63 ⇿

0Stars

63Forks

91Releases

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.

Major 0Minor 29Patch 62

Each point covers 6 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.9 / 10

5.9aggregate

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 02:39 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
n/a	Branch-Protection	internal 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
8	CI-Tests	26 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0	CII-Best-Practices	no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7	Code-Review	Found 12/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
10	Contributors	project has 22 contributing companies or organizations
10	Dangerous-Workflow	no dangerous workflow patterns detected
10	Dependency-Update-Tool	update tool detected
0	Fuzzing	project is not fuzzed
10	License	license file detected
10	Maintained	30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/a	Packaging	packaging workflow not detected
0	Pinned-Dependencies	dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0	SAST	SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0	Security-Policy	security policy file not detected
n/a	Signed-Releases	no releases found
0	Token-Permissions	detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7	Vulnerabilities	3 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 16

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
PyPI	click	`—`	bench/pyproject.toml
PyPI	pyserde	`—`	bench/pyproject.toml
PyPI	dacite	`—`	bench/pyproject.toml
PyPI	mashumaro	`>=3.13,<4.0`	bench/pyproject.toml
PyPI	marshmallow	`>=4.0,<5.0`	bench/pyproject.toml
PyPI	attrs	`>=24.3,<25.0`	bench/pyproject.toml
PyPI	cattrs	`>=25.1,<26.0`	bench/pyproject.toml
PyPI	seaborn	`—`	bench/pyproject.toml
PyPI	matplotlib	`—`	bench/pyproject.toml
PyPI	numpy	`—`	bench/pyproject.toml
PyPI	pydantic	`>=2.11.7,<3.0`	bench/pyproject.toml
PyPI	typing_extensions	`>=4.13.0,<4.17.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	casefy	`—`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	jinja2	`—`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	plum-dispatch	`>=2.3`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	beartype	`>=0.18.4`	pyproject.toml

All dependencies 149

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 27 direct and 122 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
PyPI	attrs	`—`	direct
PyPI	attrs	`24.3.0`	direct
PyPI	beartype	`0.22.6`	direct
PyPI	casefy	`1.1.0`	direct
PyPI	cattrs	`—`	direct
PyPI	cattrs	`25.2.0`	direct
PyPI	click	`—`	direct
PyPI	click	`8.3.1`	direct
PyPI	dacite	`—`	direct
PyPI	dacite	`1.9.2`	direct
PyPI	jinja2	`—`	direct
PyPI	jinja2	`3.1.6`	direct
PyPI	marshmallow	`—`	direct
PyPI	marshmallow	`4.1.2`	direct
PyPI	mashumaro	`—`	direct
PyPI	mashumaro	`3.16`	direct
PyPI	matplotlib	`3.1.1`	direct
PyPI	matplotlib	`3.10.7`	direct
PyPI	numpy	`1.17.2`	direct
PyPI	numpy	`2.2.6`	direct
PyPI	numpy	`2.3.5`	direct
PyPI	plum-dispatch	`2.6.0`	direct
PyPI	pydantic	`2.11.10`	direct
PyPI	seaborn	`0.13.2`	direct
PyPI	seaborn	`0.9.0`	direct
PyPI	typing-extensions	`4.12.2`	direct
PyPI	typing-extensions	`4.15.0`	direct
PyPI	annotated-types	`0.7.0`	indirect
PyPI	babel	`2.17.0`	indirect
PyPI	backports-datetime-fromisoformat	`2.0.3`	indirect
PyPI	backrefs	`6.1`	indirect
PyPI	black	`19.3b0`	indirect
PyPI	black	`26.5.1`	indirect
PyPI	certifi	`2026.1.4`	indirect
PyPI	cfgv	`3.5.0`	indirect
PyPI	charset-normalizer	`3.4.4`	indirect
PyPI	colorama	`0.4.6`	indirect
PyPI	contourpy	`1.3.2`	indirect
PyPI	contourpy	`1.3.3`	indirect
PyPI	coverage	`—`	indirect
PyPI	coverage	`4.5.4`	indirect
PyPI	cycler	`0.12.1`	indirect
PyPI	dataclasses	`—`	indirect
PyPI	distlib	`0.4.0`	indirect
PyPI	docopt	`0.6.2`	indirect
PyPI	envclasses	`0.2.1`	indirect
PyPI	envclasses	`0.3.1`	indirect
PyPI	exceptiongroup	`1.3.1`	indirect
PyPI	execnet	`2.1.2`	indirect
PyPI	filelock	`3.20.3`	indirect
PyPI	flake8	`—`	indirect
PyPI	flake8	`7.3.0`	indirect
PyPI	flask	`—`	indirect
PyPI	fonttools	`4.60.2`	indirect
PyPI	ghp-import	`2.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	greenlet	`3.2.4`	indirect
PyPI	griffe	`1.15.0`	indirect
PyPI	identify	`2.6.15`	indirect
PyPI	idna	`3.15`	indirect
PyPI	importlib-metadata	`8.7.1`	indirect
PyPI	importlib-resources	`6.5.2`	indirect
PyPI	iniconfig	`2.3.0`	indirect
PyPI	isort	`4.3.21`	indirect
PyPI	jaxtyping	`0.3.9`	indirect
PyPI	jedi	`0.19.2`	indirect
PyPI	kiwisolver	`1.4.9`	indirect
PyPI	librt	`0.7.3`	indirect
PyPI	markdown	`3.10.1`	indirect
PyPI	markdown-it-py	`4.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	markupsafe	`3.0.3`	indirect
PyPI	mccabe	`0.7.0`	indirect
PyPI	mdurl	`0.1.2`	indirect
PyPI	mergedeep	`1.3.4`	indirect
PyPI	mike	`2.1.3`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocs	`1.6.1`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocs-autorefs	`1.4.3`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocs-get-deps	`0.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocs-material	`9.7.7`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocs-material-extensions	`1.3.1`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocs-static-i18n	`1.3.0`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocstrings	`1.0.2`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocstrings-python	`2.0.1`	indirect
PyPI	more-itertools	`—`	indirect
PyPI	more-itertools	`10.5.0`	indirect
PyPI	msgpack	`—`	indirect
PyPI	msgpack	`1.1.2`	indirect
PyPI	msgpack-types	`0.5.0`	indirect
PyPI	mypy	`—`	indirect
PyPI	mypy	`0.782`	indirect
PyPI	mypy	`1.19.1`	indirect
PyPI	mypy-extensions	`1.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	nodeenv	`1.9.1`	indirect
PyPI	orjson	`3.11.6`	indirect
PyPI	packaging	`25.0`	indirect
PyPI	paginate	`0.5.7`	indirect
PyPI	pandas	`2.3.3`	indirect
PyPI	parso	`0.8.5`	indirect
PyPI	pathspec	`1.0.4`	indirect
PyPI	pdoc3	`—`	indirect
PyPI	pillow	`12.3.0`	indirect
PyPI	platformdirs	`4.5.0`	indirect
PyPI	pluggy	`1.6.0`	indirect
PyPI	pre-commit	`—`	indirect
PyPI	pre-commit	`4.6.2`	indirect
PyPI	pycodestyle	`2.14.0`	indirect
PyPI	pydantic-core	`2.33.2`	indirect
PyPI	pyflakes	`3.4.0`	indirect
PyPI	pygments	`2.19.2`	indirect
PyPI	pymdown-extensions	`11.0.1`	indirect
PyPI	pyparsing	`3.2.5`	indirect
PyPI	pyparsing	`3.3.2`	indirect
PyPI	pyright	`1.1.410`	indirect
PyPI	pyserde-bench	`0.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	pytest	`—`	indirect
PyPI	pytest	`9.0.3`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-cov	`—`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-flake8	`—`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-flake8	`1.3.0`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-watch	`—`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-watch	`4.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-xdist	`3.8.0`	indirect
PyPI	python-dateutil	`2.9.0.post0`	indirect
PyPI	pytokens	`0.4.1`	indirect
PyPI	pytoml	`—`	indirect
PyPI	pytz	`2025.2`	indirect
PyPI	pyyaml	`—`	indirect
PyPI	pyyaml	`6.0.3`	indirect
PyPI	pyyaml-env-tag	`1.1`	indirect
PyPI	requests	`—`	indirect
PyPI	requests	`2.33.0`	indirect
PyPI	rich	`14.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	ruff	`0.15.9`	indirect
PyPI	six	`1.17.0`	indirect
PyPI	sqlalchemy	`2.0.44`	indirect
PyPI	stringcase	`—`	indirect
PyPI	toml	`—`	indirect
PyPI	tomli-w	`1.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	twine	`—`	indirect
PyPI	types-pyyaml	`6.0.12.20250915`	indirect
PyPI	typing-inspect	`—`	indirect
PyPI	typing-inspect	`0.9.0`	indirect
PyPI	typing-inspection	`0.4.2`	indirect
PyPI	tzdata	`2025.2`	indirect
PyPI	urllib3	`2.7.0`	indirect
PyPI	verspec	`0.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	virtualenv	`20.36.1`	indirect
PyPI	wadler-lindig	`0.1.7`	indirect
PyPI	watchdog	`6.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	zipp	`3.23.0`	indirect

Dependency advisories 5

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 122 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 5 carry known advisories, of which 2 are direct. 27 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

Package	Version	Relation	Severity	Advisories	Fixed in
black	`19.3b0`	indirect	critical	4	`26.3.1`
click	`8.3.1`	direct	high	1	`8.3.3`
numpy	`1.17.2`	direct	high	6	`1.22`
msgpack	`1.1.2`	indirect	high	2	`1.2.1`
pygments	`2.19.2`	indirect	low	2	`2.20.0`

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.

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 statistics — PyPI.

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Key facts

Data collection warnings

More detail

Feedback

Related records