Public record
Software health reportschema 0.30.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-03 20:23 UTC

MartenBE / mkslides

Use mkslides to easily turn markdown files into beautiful slides using the power of Reveal.js!

PythonMIT★ 467 stars⑂ 20 forkssince Aug 2024View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

MartenBE/mkslides holds a health index of 78 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (84/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (31/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

78
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.

78
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 67 is calibrated to 78 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

MartijnPersonal account
13 followers5 public repossince Jul 2012

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
PyPImkslides2.0.193,386340 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

81Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
8.3/36Commit cadence12/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume113 commits in the last year
7/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained8 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
commits_last_year113
human_commit_share0.92
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year12

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases8 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~37.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count8
latest_release_tag2.0.19
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases37.2
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?

66Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
43.3/60Stars467 stars
10.7/25Forks20 forks
0/15Watchers2 watchers
Inputs used
forks20
stars467
watchers2
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges3
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
47.1/80Monthly downloads3,386 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesmkslides
dependents
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads
monthly_downloads3,386
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?

54Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.4/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 98% of commits
8.1/13.5Contributor breadth6 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled6
top_contributor_share0.983
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution100% of issues closed
26.5/30PR acceptance38/43 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance0/2 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 1/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs38
open_issues0
closed_issues47
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d2
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d3
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs5
first_time_authors_30d2
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d2
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
8.2/25Owner reach13 followers of MartenBE
17.7/25Track record5 public repos, account ~14 yr old
Inputs used
followers13
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginMartenBE
public_repos5
account_age_days5,136
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history34 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesmkslides
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

84Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests11 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://martenbe.github.io/mkslides/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics6 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsmarkdown, markdown-to-html, mkdocs, site-generator, slides, slideshow
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://martenbe.github.io/mkslides/
docs_sitehttps://martenbe.github.io/mkslides/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

57Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests11 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 1/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
5.2/7.5Maintained8 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 7
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate4.6
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages56
unassessed_packages0
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 56 resolved dependencies against OSV. 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.

31At Risk · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
5.8/40Legible commit history10 of 92 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.109
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance8 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.08
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePython without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/34 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes21,891
source_files_sampled34
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

467GitHub stars
6contributors
113commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
8releases
1bus factor
0open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • deps.dev does not index pypi:mkslides@2.0.19; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 20 ⇿
0Stars
20Forks
7Releases

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.

0481216202022024-112025-082026-06
Major 0Minor 0Patch 7

Each point covers 2 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.6 / 10
4.6aggregate

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 · 2026-08-03 20:22 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests11 out of 11 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 1/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
7Maintained8 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 7
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
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 15
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIbeautifulsoup4>=4.14.2pyproject.toml
PyPIclick>=8.3.1pyproject.toml
PyPIemoji>=2.15.0pyproject.toml
PyPIjinja2>=3.1.6pyproject.toml
PyPIjsonschema>=4.25.1pyproject.toml
PyPIlivereload>=2.7.1pyproject.toml
PyPImarkdown>=3.10pyproject.toml
PyPInatsort>=8.4.0pyproject.toml
PyPIomegaconf>=2.3.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpython-frontmatter>=1.1.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpyyaml>=6.0.3pyproject.toml
PyPIrich>=14.2.0pyproject.toml
PyPItreelib>=1.8.0pyproject.toml
PyPItypes-beautifulsoup4>=4.12.0.20250516pyproject.toml
PyPItypes-markdown>=3.10.0.20251106pyproject.toml
All dependencies 56

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 15 direct and 41 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIbeautifulsoup44.15.0direct
PyPIclick8.4.2direct
PyPIemoji2.15.0direct
PyPIjinja23.1.6direct
PyPIjsonschema4.26.0direct
PyPIlivereload2.7.1direct
PyPImarkdown3.10.3direct
PyPInatsort8.4.0direct
PyPIomegaconf2.3.1direct
PyPIpython-frontmatter1.3.0direct
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3direct
PyPIrich15.0.0direct
PyPItreelib1.8.0direct
PyPItypes-beautifulsoup44.12.0.20250516direct
PyPItypes-markdown3.10.2.20260712direct
PyPIantlr4-python3-runtime4.9.3indirect
PyPIast-serialize0.6.0indirect
PyPIattrs26.1.0indirect
PyPIboolean-py5.0indirect
PyPIbumpver2026.1132indirect
PyPIcachebox5.2.3indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.9indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIdeepdiff9.1.0indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIjsonschema-specifications2025.9.1indirect
PyPIlexid2021.1006indirect
PyPIlibrt0.13.0indirect
PyPIlicense-expression30.4.4indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py4.2.0indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.3indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImkslides2.0.18indirect
PyPImypy2.3.0indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPIorderly-set5.5.0indirect
PyPIpackaging26.2indirect
PyPIpathspec1.1.1indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpygments2.20.0indirect
PyPIpytest9.1.1indirect
PyPIpython-debian1.1.1indirect
PyPIpython-magic0.4.27indirect
PyPIreferencing0.37.0indirect
PyPIreuse6.2.0indirect
PyPIrpds-py2026.6.3indirect
PyPIruff0.16.1indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPIsoupsieve2.9.1indirect
PyPItoml0.10.2indirect
PyPItomlkit0.15.1indirect
PyPItornado6.5.7indirect
PyPItypes-html5lib1.1.11.20260518indirect
PyPItypes-pyyaml6.0.12.20260724indirect
PyPItypes-webencodings0.5.0.20260408indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.16.0indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 56 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

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 v0.30.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticsPyPI.