Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-27 15:00 UTC

adbar / htmldate

Fast and robust date extraction from web pages, with Python or on the command-line

PythonApache-2.0★ 155 stars⑂ 35 forkssince Aug 2017View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

adbar/htmldate holds a health index of 78 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (78/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (61/100). It was last updated 26 days ago. 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

Adrien BarbaresiPersonal account
517 followers33 public repossince Aug 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 publishTags
PyPIhtmldate1.10.014,976,9666086 days agodatetimedate-parserentity-extractionhtml-extractionhtml-parsingmetadata-extractionwebarchivesweb-scraping

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

64Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recencylast push 26 days ago
2.8/36Commit cadence4/52 weeks with commits
8.6/18Commit volume8 commits in the last year
5/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained6 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
commits_last_year8
human_commit_share0.99
days_since_last_push26
active_weeks_last_year4
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases41 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 86 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~97.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count41
latest_release_tagv1.10.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release86
mean_days_between_releases97.9
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?

69Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
35.5/60Stars155 stars
12.8/25Forks35 forks
0/15Watchers2 watchers
Inputs used
forks35
stars155
watchers2
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges7
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesreadthedocs.org, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads14,976,966 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packageshtmldate
dependents
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads
monthly_downloads14,976,966
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 factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
3.2/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 86% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth20 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled20
top_contributor_share0.859
How it's scored
34/42Issue resolution81% of issues closed
21.4/30PR acceptance95/133 decided PRs merged
6.5/13Newcomer PR acceptance1/2 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
1.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 3/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
merged_prs95
open_issues12
closed_issues51
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d2
prs_decided_30d3
issue_closed_ratio0.81
closed_unmerged_prs38
first_time_authors_30d2
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d2
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
19.5/25Owner reach517 followers of adbar
23.2/25Track record33 public repos, account ~14 yr old
Inputs used
followers517
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginadbar
public_repos33
account_age_days5,130
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 86 days ago
20/20Version history60 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageshtmldate
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish86

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

78Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configpyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
6/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests9 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://htmldate.readthedocs.io
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics14 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsmetadata-extraction, date-parser, entity-extraction, natural-language-processing, nlp, web-scraping, webscraping, date, datetime, metadata, information-extraction, digital-forensics, forensics-tools, opengraph
has_wikino
homepagehttps://htmldate.readthedocs.io
docs_sitehttps://htmldate.readthedocs.io
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

65Good · 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
0.8/2.5CI-Tests9 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 3
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0.8/7.5Code-ReviewFound 3/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
0.8/2.5Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
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
3.8/7.5Maintained6 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
3.5/5SASTSAST tool detected but not run on all commits
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
6.8/7.5Token-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_aggregate5.5
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
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriesno indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages9
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the pypi:htmldate@1.10.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 9 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.

61Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history89 of 99 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.899
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapdocs/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format configpyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
11/11Static type checkinghtmldate/py.typed
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance1 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
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesdocs/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configshtmldate/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.01
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable codePython with type-check config (htmldate/py.typed)
51.1/55Manageable file sizes1/14 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes62,383
source_files_sampled14
oversized_source_files1

Key facts

155GitHub stars
20contributors
8commits, last 12 months
26days since last push
41releases
1bus factor
12open 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 ★ / 35 ⇿
0Stars
35Forks
41Releases

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.

01325383422019-072023-012026-08
Major 1Minor 13Patch 27

Each point covers 7 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.5 / 10
5.5aggregate

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 · 2026-08-27 14:59 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
3CI-Tests9 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 3
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1Code-ReviewFound 3/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
5Maintained6 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
7SASTSAST tool detected but not run on all commits
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
9Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 5
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIcharset_normalizer>= 3.4.0pyproject.toml
PyPIdateparser>= 1.1.2pyproject.toml
PyPIlxml>= 5.3.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpython-dateutil>= 2.9.0.post0pyproject.toml
PyPIurllib3>= 1.26, < 3pyproject.toml
All dependencies 16

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 5 direct and 11 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIcharset-normalizerdirect
PyPIdateparserdirect
PyPIlxmldirect
PyPIpython-dateutildirect
PyPIurllib3direct
PyPIarticledateextractor0.20indirect
PyPIdate-guesser2.1.4indirect
PyPIfaust-cchardetindirect
PyPIgoose33.1.21indirect
PyPIhtmldateindirect
PyPInews-please1.6.16indirect
PyPInewspaper4k0.9.5indirect
PyPIsetuptoolsindirect
PyPIsphinxindirect
PyPItabulate0.10.0indirect
PyPItqdm4.67.3indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:htmldate@1.10.0 pulls in 9 packages, direct and transitive: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct dependencies.

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 v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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