Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-16 14:00 UTC

3b1b / manim

Animation engine for explanatory math videos

PythonMIT★ 93,965 stars⑂ 7,717 forkssince Mar 2015View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

3b1b/manim holds a health index of 71 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (75/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (47/100). It was last updated 6 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

71
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.

71
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 63 is calibrated to 71 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Grant SandersonPersonal account
41,703 followers9 public repossince Mar 20153Blue1Brown

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPImanimgl1.7.25,59512642 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

62Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 6 days ago
8.3/36Commit cadence — 12/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 134 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year134
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push6
active_weeks_last_year12
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 13 releases published
7.2/36Release recency — latest release 642 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~128.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count13
latest_release_tagv1.7.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release642
mean_days_between_releases128.2

Community & Adoption

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

75Good · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

100Exceptional
How it's scored
60/60Stars — 93,965 stars
25/25Forks — 7,717 forks
15/15Watchers — 958 watchers
Inputs used
forks7,717
stars93,965
watchers958
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges5
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
50/80Monthly downloads — 5,595 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesmanimgl
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads5,595
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?

61Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
4.6/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 80% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 100 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 30 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled100
top_contributor_share0.795
How it's scored
26.3/42Issue resolution — 63% of issues closed
21.9/30PR acceptance — 703/964 decided PRs merged
11.4/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 7/8 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
7.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 15/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
merged_prs703
open_issues463
closed_issues776
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d10
prs_decided_30d12
issue_closed_ratio0.626
closed_unmerged_prs261
first_time_authors_30d7
first_time_prs_merged_30d7
first_time_prs_decided_30d8
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
25/25Owner reach — 41,703 followers of 3b1b
19.3/25Track record — 9 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers41,703
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_login3b1b
public_repos9
account_age_days4,195
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
14/35Publish recency — latest publish 642 days ago
20/20Version history — 12 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesmanimgl
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish642

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

70Good · 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
2/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 3 out of 25 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://3b1b.github.io/manim/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 4 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicspython, animation, explanatory-math-videos, 3b1b-videos
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_sitehttps://3b1b.github.io/manim/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

53Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
0.2/2.5CI-Tests — 3 out of 25 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 1
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3.8/7.5Code-Review — Found 15/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 30 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 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
6.8/7.5Vulnerabilities — 1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate4.4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
26.6/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: diskcache 5.6.3 (moderate)
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
37.2/40No advisories left outstanding — 1 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 216 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories2
affected_packages1
assessed_packages54
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitymoderate 1
direct_affected_packages1
Matched the pypi:manimgl@1.7.2 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 54 packages. 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.

47Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 90 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.9
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — docs/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 68 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
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_languageno
bootstrap_filesdocs/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.68
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
54.5/55Manageable file sizes — 1/116 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes82,019
source_files_sampled116
oversized_source_files1

Key facts

93,965GitHub stars
100contributors
134commits, last 12 months
6days since last push
13releases
1bus factor
463open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 7,717 ⇿
0Stars
7,717Forks

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.

6,5006,7507,0007,2507,5007,7507,717312025-112026-042026-09
OpenSSF Scorecard 4.4 / 10
4.4aggregate

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 · 2026-09-16 13:59 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
1CI-Tests3 out of 25 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 1
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
5Code-ReviewFound 15/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
10Contributorsproject has 30 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 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
9Vulnerabilities1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 30
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIaddict—setup.cfg
PyPIappdirs—setup.cfg
PyPIaudioop-lts—setup.cfg
PyPIcolour—setup.cfg
PyPIdiskcache—setup.cfg
PyPIipython>=8.18.0setup.cfg
PyPIisosurfaces—setup.cfg
PyPIfontTools—setup.cfg
PyPIglfw—setup.cfg
PyPImanimpango>=0.6.0setup.cfg
PyPImatplotlib—setup.cfg
PyPInumpy—setup.cfg
PyPIPillow—setup.cfg
PyPIpydub—setup.cfg
PyPIpygments—setup.cfg
PyPIpyperclip—setup.cfg
PyPIpywavefront—setup.cfg
PyPIpyyaml—setup.cfg
PyPIrendercanvas—setup.cfg
PyPIrich—setup.cfg
PyPIscipy—setup.cfg
PyPIsetuptools—setup.cfg
PyPIskia-pathops—setup.cfg
PyPIsvgelements>=1.8.1setup.cfg
PyPIsympy—setup.cfg
PyPItrimesh—setup.cfg
PyPItqdm—setup.cfg
PyPItyping-extensions—setup.cfg
PyPIvalidators—setup.cfg
PyPIwgpu—setup.cfg
All dependencies 34

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 29 direct and 5 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIaddict—direct
PyPIappdirs—direct
PyPIaudioop-lts—direct
PyPIcolour—direct
PyPIdiskcache—direct
PyPIfonttools—direct
PyPIglfw—direct
PyPIipython—direct
PyPIisosurfaces—direct
PyPImanimpango—direct
PyPImatplotlib—direct
PyPInumpy—direct
PyPIpillow—direct
PyPIpydub—direct
PyPIpygments—direct
PyPIpyperclip—direct
PyPIpywavefront—direct
PyPIpyyaml—direct
PyPIrendercanvas—direct
PyPIrich—direct
PyPIscipy—direct
PyPIsetuptools—direct
PyPIskia-pathops—direct
PyPIsvgelements—direct
PyPIsympy—direct
PyPItqdm—direct
PyPItrimesh—direct
PyPIvalidators—direct
PyPIwgpu—direct
PyPIav—indirect
PyPIfuro—indirect
PyPIjinja2—indirect
PyPIsphinx—indirect
PyPIsphinx-copybutton—indirect
Dependency advisories 1

Installing pypi:manimgl@1.7.2 pulls in 54 packages, direct and transitive: 1 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct dependencies.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
diskcache5.6.3directmoderate2—

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 — PyPI.