Metacheck Analysis Report

Metadata

  • date of analysis: 2026-03-05 11:10:23
  • metacheck version: 0.1.0
  • SOMEF version: 0.9.12

Summary of Analysis

  • Total repositories analyzed: 29
  • Total pitfalls detected: 54 (1.86 per repo)
  • Total warnings detected: 54 (1.86 per repo)
  • Repositories with pitfalls: 26

Pitfalls & Warnings Details

Warnings

Warning Code Description Count
W001 Software requirements in metadata files don't have version specifications 16 (55.2%)
W002 The dateModified in codemeta.json is outdated compared to the actual repository last update date 14 (48.3%)
W003 Codemeta.json repository has multiple licenses but only one is listed 8 (27.6%)
W004 Programming languages in codemeta.json do not have versions 22 (75.9%)
W005 The metadata file softwareRequirements have more than one req, but it's written as one string 2 (6.9%)

Pitfalls

Pitfall Code Description Count
P001 The metadata file (codemeta or other) has a version which does not correspond to the version used in the latest release 11 (37.9%)
P003 Metadata files have multiple authors in single field instead of a list 2 (6.9%)
P004 In codemeta.json README property pointing to their homepage/wiki instead of README file 5 (17.2%)
P005 codemeta.json referencePublication refers to software archive instead of paper 2 (6.9%)
P006 The metadata file has License pointing to a local file instead of stating the name 1 (3.4%)
P008 The metadata file softwareRequirement points to an invalid page 4 (13.8%)
P009 The metadata file coderepository points to their homepage 1 (3.4%)
P012 codemeta.json downloadURL is outdated 5 (17.2%)
P013 The metadata file License does not have the specific version 8 (27.6%)
P014 codemeta.json uses bare DOIs in the identifier field instead of full https://doi.org/ URL 6 (20.7%)
P017 codemeta.json version does not match the package's 1 (3.4%)

Analysis Plot

Analysis Plot