Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-12 15:03 UTC

zoidsh / meru

:postbox: Gmail desktop app for macOS, Windows & Linux (formerly Gmail Desktop)

TypeScriptAGPL-3.0★ 1,032 stars⑂ 106 forkssince Apr 2016View on GitHub ↗

zoidsh/meru holds a health index of 77 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (94/100) and lowest on Sustainability & Governance (51/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

77
overall / 100
Good

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.

77
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 66 is calibrated to 77 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

ZoidOrganization
4 followers3 public repossince Jan 2024

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

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

94Exceptional · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
32.5/36Commit cadence — 47/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 896 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 12 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year896
human_commit_share0.98
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year47
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 8 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~7 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv3.60.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release8
mean_days_between_releases7

Community & Adoption

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

61Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
48.9/60Stars — 1,032 stars
16.8/25Forks — 106 forks
5.6/15Watchers — 11 watchers
Inputs used
forks106
stars1,032
watchers11
growth_stateorganic
growth_factor_pct100
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (AGPL-3.0)
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

Sustainability & Governance

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

51Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
1.7/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 92% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 15 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 7 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled15
top_contributor_share0.924
How it's scored
41.5/42Issue resolution — 99% of issues closed
25.6/30PR acceptance — 591/692 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs591
open_issues3
closed_issues265
prs_merged_7d8
prs_decided_7d12
prs_merged_30d53
prs_decided_30d58
issue_closed_ratio0.989
closed_unmerged_prs101
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 backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
5/25Owner reach — 4 followers of zoidsh
9.6/25Track record — 3 public repos, account ~2 yr old
Inputs used
followers4
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginzoidsh
public_repos3
account_age_days958

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 — 18 out of 18 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
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://meru.so
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 9 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsgmail, electron, macos, windows, linux, app, email, gmail-desktop, ubuntu
has_wikino
homepagehttps://meru.so
docs_sitehttps://meru.so
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

58Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 18 out of 18 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 0/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 7 contributing companies or organizations
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 12 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
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.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — no data
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate4.7
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, Vulnerabilities. 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_packages2
unassessed_packages61
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 2 resolved dependencies against OSV. 61 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.

63Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 86 of 98 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.878
agent_instruction_filesCLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes9,582
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — packages/app/tsconfig.json, packages/dark-theme/tsconfig.json, packages/electron-extensions/tsconfig.json, packages/preload-gmail/tsconfig.json, packages/preload-renderer/tsconfig.json, packages/preload-workspace-app/tsconfig.json, packages/renderer/tsconfig.json, packages/shared/tsconfig.json, packages/ui/tsconfig.json, packages/verification-code/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency 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_configspackages/app/tsconfig.json, packages/dark-theme/tsconfig.json, packages/electron-extensions/tsconfig.json, packages/preload-gmail/tsconfig.json, packages/preload-renderer/tsconfig.json, packages/preload-workspace-app/tsconfig.json, packages/renderer/tsconfig.json, packages/shared/tsconfig.json, packages/ui/tsconfig.json, packages/verification-code/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — TypeScript (statically typed)
54.9/55Manageable file sizes — 1/387 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageTypeScript
largest_source_bytes91,382
source_files_sampled387
oversized_source_files1

Key facts

1,032GitHub stars
15contributors
896commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
3open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Star history carried forward from 2026-07-10: GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository admins, so it can no longer be collected. The repository has 1032 stars today.

More detail

Star and fork history 1,025 ★ / 106 ⇿
1,025Stars
106Forks
99Releases

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.

Only the most recent history is shown — this repository exceeds the collection window, so the earliest history is not captured.

Star history is shown as collected on 2026-07-10. GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository administrators in July 2026, so this series can no longer be extended; the current star total above remains live.

02004006008001,0001,2001,025105182016-052021-072026-08
Major 0Minor 51Patch 48

Each point covers 10 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.7 / 10
4.7aggregate

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 · 2026-09-12 15:02 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-Tests18 out of 18 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 0/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 7 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 12 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
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
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
n/aVulnerabilitiesinternal error: vulnerabilitiesClient.ListUnfixedVulnerabilities: osvscanner.DoScan: client error: status="400 Bad Request" body={"code":3,"message":"error in query at index 53: rpc error: code = InvalidArgument desc = invalid hash"}
All dependencies 63

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 63 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@base-ui/react^1.4.0indirect
npm@dnd-kit/dom^0.5.0indirect
npm@dnd-kit/helpers^0.5.0indirect
npm@dnd-kit/react^0.5.0indirect
npm@electron-toolkit/preload^3.0.2indirect
npm@electron-toolkit/typed-ipc^1.0.2indirect
npm@electron-toolkit/utils^4.0.0indirect
npm@fontsource-variable/inter^5.2.5indirect
npm@playwright/test^1.62.1indirect
npm@tailwindcss/postcss^4.2.2indirect
npm@tailwindcss/typography^0.5.19indirect
npm@tailwindcss/vite^4.2.2indirect
npm@tanstack/react-form^1.28.5indirect
npm@tanstack/react-query^5.90.5indirect
npm@tanstack/react-table^8.21.3indirect
npm@timche/oxc-configs^1.0.6indirect
npm@total-typescript/tsconfig^1.0.4indirect
npm@types/bun^1.3.12indirect
npm@types/react^19.1.16indirect
npm@types/react-dom^19.1.9indirect
npm@vitejs/plugin-react^6.0.1indirect
npmclass-variance-authority^0.7.1indirect
npmclsx^2.1.1indirect
npmdayjs^1.11.13indirect
npmelectron^43.7.0indirect
npmelectron-builder26.15.6indirect
npmelectron-context-menu^4.1.0indirect
npmelectron-dl^4.0.0indirect
npmelectron-log^5.4.0indirect
npmelectron-store^10.0.1indirect
npmelectron-updater^6.6.2indirect
npmelement-ready^7.0.0indirect
npmfast-xml-parser^5.5.7indirect
npmfflate^0.8.3indirect
npmfrimousse^0.3.0indirect
npmis-online^12.0.2indirect
npmlefthook^2.1.2indirect
npmlucide-react^0.475.0indirect
npmmeru-api-client2.1.1indirect
npmnode-machine-id^1.1.12indirect
npmoxfmt^0.57.0indirect
npmoxlint^1.72.0indirect
npmpostcss^8.5.8indirect
npmreact^19.1.1indirect
npmreact-dom^19.1.1indirect
npmreact-hotkeys-hook^5.1.0indirect
npmreact-markdown^10.1.0indirect
npmrehype-raw^7.0.0indirect
npmrolldown^1.0.0-rc.10indirect
npmselect-dom^9.3.0indirect
npmserialize-error^13.0.1indirect
npmshadcn^4.1.0indirect
npmsonner^2.0.7indirect
npmtailwind-merge^3.3.1indirect
npmtailwindcss^4.2.2indirect
npmtw-animate-css^1.4.0indirect
npmtype-fest^5.2.0indirect
npmtypescript^7.0.2indirect
npmuse-debounce^10.0.6indirect
npmvite^8.0.1indirect
npmwouter^3.7.1indirect
npmzod^3.24.2indirect
npmzustand^5.0.3indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 2 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 61 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

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 statistics.