Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-12 08:37 UTC

barseghyanartur / tld

Extracts the top level domain (TLD) from the URL given.

PythonCustom license★ 187 stars⑂ 37 forkssince Jul 2013View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined
#python#tld#top-level-domain#url-parsing#domain-parsing

barseghyanartur/tld holds a health index of 71 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (90/100) and lowest on Vitality (39/100). It was last updated 127 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

Artur BarseghyanPersonal account
192 followers2,534 public repossince Jul 2013

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
PyPItld0.13.215,392,08253189 days agotldtop-level-domain-namespython

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

39Weak · 21% of overall

Development activity

23At Risk
How it's scored
9.9/36Push recency — last push 127 days ago
2.1/36Commit cadence — 3/52 weeks with commits
10.6/18Commit volume — 14 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year14
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push127
active_weeks_last_year3

Release discipline

62Moderate
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 48 releases published
16.2/36Release recency — latest release 189 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~235.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count48
latest_release_tag0.13.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release189
mean_days_between_releases235.1
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?

73Good · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

50Moderate
How it's scored
36.8/60Stars — 187 stars
13/25Forks — 37 forks
0/15Watchers — 2 watchers
Inputs used
forks37
stars187
watchers2
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

79Good
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
16.9/22.5License — license file present, not a recognized license
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code 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_conductyes
readme_badge_servicescoveralls.io, github.com, readthedocs.org, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

100Exceptional
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads — 15,392,082 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagestld
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads15,392,082
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?

64Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

35Weak
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
2.2/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 90% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 15 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 18 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled15
top_contributor_share0.902

Issue & PR responsiveness

79Good
How it's scored
39.3/42Issue resolution — 94% of issues closed
29.1/30PR acceptance — 68/70 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 2/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs68
open_issues5
closed_issues72
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.935
closed_unmerged_prs2
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

64Moderate
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
16.4/25Owner reach — 192 followers of barseghyanartur
25/25Track record — 2,534 public repos, account ~13 yr old
Inputs used
followers192
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginbarseghyanartur
public_repos2,534
account_age_days4,819
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

91Excellent
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
26/35Publish recency — latest publish 189 days ago
20/20Version history — 53 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagestld
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish189

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

90Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

84Excellent
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff]), tox.ini
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
10/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 12 out of 22 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://pypi.python.org/pypi/tld
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 5 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicspython, tld, top-level-domain, url-parsing, domain-parsing
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://pypi.python.org/pypi/tld
docs_sitehttps://pypi.python.org/pypi/tld
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

55Moderate · 16% of overall

Security posture

44Weak
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
1.2/2.5CI-Tests — 12 out of 22 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 2/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 18 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
2.2/2.5License — license file detected
0/7.5Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
2.5/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 5
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
7.5/7.5Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 14 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): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories61
affected_packages9
assessed_packages116
unassessed_packages8
affected_by_severitycritical 1, high 3, moderate 4, low 1
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 116 resolved dependencies against OSV. 8 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list. 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.

56Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

13Critical
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
13.3/40Legible commit history — 25 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.25
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

62Moderate
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile, docs/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff]), tox.ini
11/11Static type checking — src/tld/py.typed
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
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_filesMakefile, docs/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configssrc/tld/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0

Code legibility for models

80Excellent
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (src/tld/py.typed)
53.2/55Manageable file sizes — 1/31 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes220,071
source_files_sampled31
oversized_source_files1

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — examples, notebooks
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples, notebooks
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_of—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

187GitHub stars
15contributors
14commits, last 12 months
127days since last push
48releases
1bus factor
5open 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 ★ / 37 ⇿
0Stars
37Forks
48Releases

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.

01325383742013-122020-032026-06
Major 0Minor 0Patch 38

Each point covers 12 days.

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 · 2026-09-12 08:37 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
5CI-Tests12 out of 22 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 2/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 18 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
9Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 5
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
0Vulnerabilities14 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 124

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 124 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIalabaster1.0.0indirect
PyPIanyio4.12.1indirect
PyPIasttokens3.0.1indirect
PyPIbabel2.18.0indirect
PyPIbuild1.4.0indirect
PyPIcachetools7.0.3indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.2.25indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.5indirect
PyPIclick8.3.1indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcontourpy1.3.3indirect
PyPIcoverage7.13.4indirect
PyPIcycler0.12.1indirect
PyPIdecorator5.2.1indirect
PyPIdetect-secrets1.5.0indirect
PyPIdistlib0.4.0indirect
PyPIdoc82.0.0indirect
PyPIdocstring-parser-fork0.0.14indirect
PyPIdocutils0.21.2indirect
PyPIexecuting2.2.1indirect
PyPIfake-py0.12.2indirect
PyPIfilelock3.25.0indirect
PyPIfonttools4.61.1indirect
PyPIgprof2dot2025.4.14indirect
PyPIh110.16.0indirect
PyPIid1.6.1indirect
PyPIidna3.11indirect
PyPIimagesize2.0.0indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIipython9.11.0indirect
PyPIipython-pygments-lexers1.1.1indirect
PyPIjaraco-classes3.4.0indirect
PyPIjaraco-context6.1.0indirect
PyPIjaraco-functools4.4.0indirect
PyPIjedi0.19.2indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPIkeyring25.7.0indirect
PyPIkiwisolver1.4.9indirect
PyPIline-profiler—indirect
PyPIline-profiler5.0.2indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py4.0.0indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.3indirect
PyPImatplotlib—indirect
PyPImatplotlib3.10.8indirect
PyPImatplotlib-inline0.2.1indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImemory-profiler—indirect
PyPImemory-profiler0.61.0indirect
PyPImore-itertools10.8.0indirect
PyPInh30.3.3indirect
PyPInumpy2.4.2indirect
PyPIpackaging26.0indirect
PyPIparso0.8.6indirect
PyPIpexpect4.9.0indirect
PyPIpillow12.1.1indirect
PyPIpkginfo1.12.1.2indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.9.4indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIprompt-toolkit3.0.52indirect
PyPIpsutil7.2.2indirect
PyPIptyprocess0.7.0indirect
PyPIpure-eval0.2.3indirect
PyPIpy-spy—indirect
PyPIpy-spy0.4.1indirect
PyPIpycallgraph2—indirect
PyPIpycallgraph21.1.3indirect
PyPIpydoclint0.8.3indirect
PyPIpygments2.19.2indirect
PyPIpyparsing3.3.2indirect
PyPIpyprof2calltree—indirect
PyPIpyprof2calltree1.4.5indirect
PyPIpyproject-api1.10.0indirect
PyPIpyproject-hooks1.2.0indirect
PyPIpytest9.0.2indirect
PyPIpytest-codeblock0.5.6indirect
PyPIpytest-cov7.0.0indirect
PyPIpytest-ordering0.6indirect
PyPIpytest-profiling—indirect
PyPIpytest-profiling1.8.1indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0indirect
PyPIpython-discovery1.1.0indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIreadme-renderer44.0indirect
PyPIrequests2.32.5indirect
PyPIrequests-toolbelt1.0.0indirect
PyPIrestructuredtext-lint2.0.2indirect
PyPIrfc39862.0.0indirect
PyPIrich14.3.3indirect
PyPIroman-numerals4.1.0indirect
PyPIruff0.15.5indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPIsnowballstemmer3.0.1indirect
PyPIsphinx9.1.0indirect
PyPIsphinx-autobuild2025.8.25indirect
PyPIsphinx-llms-txt-link0.1.2indirect
PyPIsphinx-no-pragma0.1.3indirect
PyPIsphinx-rtd-theme3.1.0indirect
PyPIsphinx-source-tree0.2.3indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-applehelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-devhelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-htmlhelp2.1.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-jquery4.1indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-jsmath1.0.1indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-qthelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-serializinghtml2.0.0indirect
PyPIstack-data0.6.3indirect
PyPIstarlette0.52.1indirect
PyPIstdeb—indirect
PyPIstdeb0.11.0indirect
PyPIstevedore5.7.0indirect
PyPItomli-w1.2.0indirect
PyPItox4.49.0indirect
PyPItraitlets5.14.3indirect
PyPItwine6.2.0indirect
PyPIty0.0.34indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.15.0indirect
PyPIurllib32.6.3indirect
PyPIuv0.10.9indirect
PyPIuvicorn0.41.0indirect
PyPIvirtualenv21.1.0indirect
PyPIwatchfiles1.1.1indirect
PyPIwcwidth0.6.0indirect
PyPIwebsockets16.0indirect
PyPIwheel0.46.3indirect
Dependency advisories 9

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 116 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 9 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 8 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
pillow12.1.1indirectcritical3612.3.0
click8.3.1indirecthigh18.3.3
starlette0.52.1indirecthigh101.3.1
urllib32.6.3indirecthigh42.7.0
idna3.11indirectmoderate23.15
pytest9.0.2indirectmoderate29.0.3
requests2.32.5indirectmoderate22.33.0
uv0.10.9indirectmoderate20.11.15
pygments2.19.2indirectlow22.20.0

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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with barseghyanartur/tld. Read them side by side →

100apache/airflowApache Airflow - A platform to programmatically author, schedule, and monitor workflowsExceptional100astropy/astropyAstronomy and astrophysics core libraryExceptional100psf/blackThe uncompromising Python code formatterExceptional100aws/aws-sam-cliCLI tool to build, test, debug, and deploy Serverless applications using AWS SAMExceptional100matplotlib/matplotlibmatplotlib: plotting with PythonExceptional100PrefectHQ/prefectPrefect is a workflow orchestration framework for building resilient data pipelines in Python.Exceptional

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.