OSSTRL - Open Source Software Technology Readiness Level (OSSTRL) 1–9 v1.0.0 released

OSSTRL - Open Source Software Technology Readiness Level (OSSTRL) 1–9

An open-source application that estimates an Open Source Software Technology Readiness Level (OSSTRL) 1–9 from evidence that can be gathered automatically from a GitHub repository.

OSSTRL vs. traditional TRL

	OSSTRL	Traditional Technology Readiness Level (TRL)
Purpose	Estimates the readiness and sustainability of an open-source software project	Assesses the maturity of a technology from basic principles through operational use
Primary evidence	Automatically observable GitHub repository signals	Experimental validation, demonstrations, deployment and operational evidence
Focus	Community, governance, development, support, security and privacy	Technical maturity in increasingly realistic environments
Output	A 1–9 estimate plus an evidence score and confidence/coverage	A 1–9 level supported by domain-specific review
Key limitation	Cannot prove adoption or performance in an operational environment from repository data alone	Does not by itself evaluate open-source project health or sustainability

OSSTRL complements rather than replaces a formal TRL assessment: it makes open-source project readiness visible using evidence that can be collected consistently from a repository.

The evidence model is inspired by the Apereo OSS Health and Sustainability Rubric. It intentionally does not claim to reproduce the complete Apereo assessment: the Apereo rubric contains 40+ criteria, and several important maturity facts cannot be proven from a GitHub repository alone (real-world implementations, actual adoption, funding sustainability, accessibility conformance, deployment environment, etc.).

Instead, this application does the following:

1. collects GitHub-verifiable evidence;
2. maps it into the Apereo areas Community, Governance, Development, Support, Security/Privacy;
3. computes a weighted 0–100 evidence score;
4. maps the score to OSSTRL 1–9;
5. applies readiness gates so documentation alone cannot produce a high level;
6. reports evidence coverage/confidence separately from the score.

For more details How mature is this repository? My long quest for open-source software metrics