Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-01 10:32 UTC

borisschapira / jekyll-microtypo

a Jekyll plugin that attempts to fix french (and some english) microtypography

RubyMIT★ 8 stars⑂ 1 forksince Aug 2016View on GitHub ↗

borisschapira/jekyll-microtypo holds a health index of 48 out of 100, placing it in the Weak band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (59/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (35/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

48
overall / 100
Weak

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.

48
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 49 is calibrated to 48 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Boris SchapiraPersonal account
70 followers94 public repossince May 2010@contentsquare

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
RubyGemsjekyll-microtypo2.0.3-270 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

48Weak · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
2.1/36Commit cadence3/52 weeks with commits
8.6/18Commit volume8 commits in the last year
1/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
commits_last_year8
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year3
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases23 version tags (no GitHub releases)
0/36Release recencylatest release 2,570 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~27.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count23
latest_release_tagv1.2.5
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release2,570
mean_days_between_releases27.6
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?

38Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
13.7/60Stars8 stars
0/25Forks1 forks
0/15Watchers2 watchers
Inputs used
forks1
stars8
watchers2
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges2
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesbadge.fury.io, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
48.6/80Total downloads47,122 downloads all-time across rubygems
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesjekyll-microtypo
dependents
ecosystemsrubygems
total_downloads47,122
monthly_downloads
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?

59Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.8/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 97% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth2 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 4 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.966
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution100% of issues closed
20/30PR acceptance2/3 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs2
open_issues0
closed_issues9
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs1
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.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
13.3/25Owner reach70 followers of borisschapira
25/25Track record94 public repos, account ~16 yr old
Inputs used
followers70
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginborisschapira
public_repos94
account_age_days5,944
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 rubygems
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history27 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesjekyll-microtypo
ecosystemsrubygems
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

56Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.rubocop.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Testsno data
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttp://borisschapira.github.io/jekyll-microtypo/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics2 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsjekyll-plugin, typography
has_wikino
homepagehttp://borisschapira.github.io/jekyll-microtypo/
docs_sitehttp://borisschapira.github.io/jekyll-microtypo/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

45Weak · 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
0/2.5CI-Testsno data
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 4 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
0.8/7.5Maintained2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesno data
0/5SASTno SAST tool detected
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsno data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated12
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive6
scorecard_aggregate3.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. 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_packages47
unassessed_packages8
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 47 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.

35Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
6.7/40Legible commit history11 of 87 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.126
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config.rubocop.yml
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 87
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesno data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesGemfile.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codeRuby without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/4 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRuby
largest_source_bytes9,258
source_files_sampled4
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

8GitHub stars
2contributors
8commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
23releases
1bus factor
0open issues
RubyGemspackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.1 / 10
3.1aggregate

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 · 2026-09-01 10:31 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
n/aCI-Testsno pull request found
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 4 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
1Maintained2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTno SAST tool detected
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 55

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 55 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
RubyGemsaddressable2.9.0indirect
RubyGemsast2.4.3indirect
RubyGemsbase64indirect
RubyGemsbase640.2.0indirect
RubyGemsbigdecimalindirect
RubyGemsbigdecimal3.1.9indirect
RubyGemsbundlerindirect
RubyGemscolorator1.1.0indirect
RubyGemsconcurrent-ruby1.3.8indirect
RubyGemscsvindirect
RubyGemscsv3.3.6indirect
RubyGemsem-websocket0.5.3indirect
RubyGemseventmachine1.2.7indirect
RubyGemsffi1.17.4indirect
RubyGemsforwardable-extended2.6.0indirect
RubyGemsgoogle-protobuf3.25.8indirect
RubyGemshttp_parser.rb0.8.1indirect
RubyGemsi18n1.15.2indirect
RubyGemsjekyllindirect
RubyGemsjekyll4.4.1indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-sass-converter3.0.0indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-watch2.2.1indirect
RubyGemsjson2.21.2indirect
RubyGemskramdown2.5.2indirect
RubyGemskramdown-parser-gfm1.1.0indirect
RubyGemslanguage_server-protocol3.17.0.6indirect
RubyGemsliquid4.0.4indirect
RubyGemslisten3.10.0indirect
RubyGemslogger1.7.0indirect
RubyGemsmercenary0.4.0indirect
RubyGemsminitestindirect
RubyGemsminitest5.27.0indirect
RubyGemsparallel1.28.0indirect
RubyGemsparser3.3.12.0indirect
RubyGemspathutil0.16.2indirect
RubyGemsprism1.9.0indirect
RubyGemspublic_suffix7.0.5indirect
RubyGemsracc1.8.1indirect
RubyGemsrainbow3.1.1indirect
RubyGemsrakeindirect
RubyGemsrake12.3.3indirect
RubyGemsrb-fsevent0.11.2indirect
RubyGemsrb-inotify0.11.1indirect
RubyGemsregexp_parser2.12.0indirect
RubyGemsrexml3.4.4indirect
RubyGemsrouge4.7.0indirect
RubyGemsrubocopindirect
RubyGemsrubocop1.68.0indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-ast1.50.0indirect
RubyGemsruby-progressbar1.13.0indirect
RubyGemssafe_yaml1.0.5indirect
RubyGemssass-embedded1.63.3indirect
RubyGemsterminal-table3.0.2indirect
RubyGemsunicode-display_width2.6.0indirect
RubyGemswebrick1.9.2indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 47 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 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.

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 statisticsRubyGems.