Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-28 08:26 UTC

Python-Markdown / markdown

A Python implementation of John Gruber’s Markdown with Extension support.

PythonBSD-3-Clause★ 4,242 stars⑂ 903 forkssince May 2010View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolPluginhow this is determined

Python-Markdown/markdown holds a health index of 91 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (95/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (41/100). It was last updated 3 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

91
overall / 100
Excellent

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.

91
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 77 is calibrated to 91 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Python-MarkdownOrganization
68 followers4 public repossince Mar 2015

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIMarkdown3.10.3124,391,2116128 days agomarkdownmarkdown-parserpython-markdownmarkdown-to-html

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

75Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 3 days ago
10.4/36Commit cadence15/52 weeks with commits
12.9/18Commit volume26 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained7 commit(s) and 6 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year26
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push3
active_weeks_last_year15
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases12 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 28 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~96.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count12
latest_release_tag3.10.3
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release28
mean_days_between_releases96.4

Community & Adoption

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

95Exceptional · 17% of overall
How it's scored
58.8/60Stars4,242 stars
24.6/25Forks903 forks
10.4/15Watchers76 watchers
Inputs used
forks903
stars4,242
watchers76
growth_stateorganic
growth_factor_pct100

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (BSD-3-Clause)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads124,391,211 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesMarkdown
dependents
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads
monthly_downloads124,391,211
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?

75Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
12.1/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 46% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth100 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 37 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled100
top_contributor_share0.461
How it's scored
40.8/42Issue resolution97% of issues closed
22.3/30PR acceptance482/647 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance2/2 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
10.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 22/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
merged_prs482
open_issues27
closed_issues936
prs_merged_7d2
prs_decided_7d2
prs_merged_30d4
prs_decided_30d4
issue_closed_ratio0.972
closed_unmerged_prs165
first_time_authors_30d2
first_time_prs_merged_30d2
first_time_prs_decided_30d2
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domain
13.2/25Owner reach68 followers of Python-Markdown
17.1/25Track record4 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers68
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginPython-Markdown
public_repos4
account_age_days4,196

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 28 days ago
20/20Version history61 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesMarkdown
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish28

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

89Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows6 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configtox.ini
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
18/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests26 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://python-markdown.github.io/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics6 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicspython-markdown, markdown, markdown-parser, markdown-to-html, python, python3
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://python-markdown.github.io/
docs_sitehttps://python-markdown.github.io/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

56Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
2.2/2.5CI-Tests26 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
5.2/7.5Code-ReviewFound 22/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 37 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
5/5Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained7 commit(s) and 6 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
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-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate5.6
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection. Remaining weights renormalized.

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.

41Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
22.4/40Legible commit history42 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.42
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapmakefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format configtox.ini
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesmakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePython without a type-check config
54.2/55Manageable file sizes1/71 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes60,063
source_files_sampled71
oversized_source_files1

Key facts

4,242GitHub stars
100contributors
26commits, last 12 months
3days since last push
12releases
2bus factor
27open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Star history carried forward from 2026-07-17: GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository admins, so it can no longer be collected. The repository has 4242 stars today.
  • No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

More detail

Star and fork history 4,226 ★ / 903 ⇿
4,226Stars
903Forks
12Releases

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 2026-07-17. 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.

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0004,226884242011-052018-122026-08
Major 0Minor 2Patch 7

Each point covers 14 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.6 / 10
5.6aggregate

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 · 2026-08-28 08:25 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
9CI-Tests26 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7Code-ReviewFound 22/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
10Contributorsproject has 37 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
10Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained7 commit(s) and 6 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow 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
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 5

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 5 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPImdx-gh-linksindirect
PyPImkdocsindirect
PyPImkdocs-natureindirect
PyPImkdocstringsindirect
PyPIsetuptoolsindirect
Dependency advisories not assessed

Advisory matching could not run for this report: No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

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 statisticsPyPI.