Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-12 23:59 UTC

deanmalmgren / textract

extract text from any document. no muss. no fuss.

HTML · Python · Rich Text FormatMIT★ 4,687 stars⑂ 708 forkssince Jul 2014View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

deanmalmgren/textract holds a health index of 86 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (83/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (45/100). It was last updated 7 days ago. 5 contributors account for most of its recent work.

86
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.

86
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 72 is calibrated to 86 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Dean MalmgrenPersonal account
198 followers83 public repossince Apr 2010@PlanetFwd

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
PyPItextract2.0.0-18107 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

65Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 7 days ago
5.5/36Commit cadence8/52 weeks with commits
13.1/18Commit volume28 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained11 commit(s) and 20 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year28
human_commit_share0.95
days_since_last_push7
active_weeks_last_year8
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases18 releases published
27/36Release recencylatest release 107 days ago
5.4/27Release cadencea release every ~440.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count18
latest_release_tagv2.0.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release107
mean_days_between_releases440.2
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?

83Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
59.5/60Stars4,687 stars
23.7/25Forks708 forks
10.9/15Watchers93 watchers
Inputs used
forks708
stars4,687
watchers93
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep?

77Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
45.9/54Bus factor5 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
19.7/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 13% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth36 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 10 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor5
contributors_sampled36
top_contributor_share0.126
How it's scored
32.6/42Issue resolution78% of issues closed
9.4/30PR acceptance97/311 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance0/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
13.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 21/22 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
merged_prs97
open_issues60
closed_issues207
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio0.775
closed_unmerged_prs214
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
16.5/25Owner reach198 followers of deanmalmgren
25/25Track record83 public repos, account ~16 yr old
Inputs used
followers198
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_logindeanmalmgren
public_repos83
account_age_days5,950
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 107 days ago
20/20Version history18 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagestextract
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish107

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

74Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
8/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests13 out of 27 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttp://textract.readthedocs.io
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics4 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicspython, natural-language-processing, data-mining, text-mining
has_wikiyes
homepagehttp://textract.readthedocs.io
docs_sitehttp://textract.readthedocs.io
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

68Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3.8/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
1/2.5CI-Tests13 out of 27 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 4
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6.8/7.5Code-ReviewFound 21/22 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 10 contributing companies or organizations
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
7.5/7.5Maintained11 commit(s) and 20 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
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
6.8/7.5Vulnerabilities1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate6
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_packages34
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:textract@2.0.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 34 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.

45Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
23/40Legible commit history41 of 95 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.432
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapMakefile, docs/Makefile, tests/Makefile
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 maintenance5 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_filesMakefile, docs/Makefile, tests/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.05
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codeHTML without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/72 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageHTML
largest_source_bytes11,229
source_files_sampled72
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

4,687GitHub stars
36contributors
28commits, last 12 months
7days since last push
18releases
5bus factor
60open 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 ★ / 708 ⇿
0Stars
708Forks
15Releases

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.

0125250375500625750681442014-072020-072026-08
Major 2Minor 7Patch 5

Each point covers 11 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.0 / 10
6.0aggregate

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 · 2026-08-12 23:58 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
4CI-Tests13 out of 27 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 4
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
9Code-ReviewFound 21/22 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
10Contributorsproject has 10 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained11 commit(s) and 20 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
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
9Vulnerabilities1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 13
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIPillow>=12.2.0pyproject.toml
PyPISpeechRecognition>=3.8.1pyproject.toml
PyPIargcomplete>=3.6.3pyproject.toml
PyPIbeautifulsoup4>=4.8.0pyproject.toml
PyPIlxml>=4.9.0pyproject.toml
PyPIchardet>=5.2.0pyproject.toml
PyPIdocx2txt>=0.8pyproject.toml
PyPIextract-msg>=0.40.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpdfminer.six>=20221105pyproject.toml
PyPIpython-pptx>=0.6.18pyproject.toml
PyPIopenpyxl>=3.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIxlrd>=2.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIodfpy>=1.4.1pyproject.toml
All dependencies 91

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 13 direct and 78 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIargcomplete3.7.0direct
PyPIbeautifulsoup44.15.0direct
PyPIchardet7.4.3direct
PyPIdocx2txt0.9direct
PyPIextract-msg0.56.0direct
PyPIlxml6.1.1direct
PyPIodfpy1.4.1direct
PyPIopenpyxl3.1.5direct
PyPIpdfminer-six20260107direct
PyPIpillow12.3.0direct
PyPIpython-pptx1.0.2direct
PyPIspeechrecognition3.17.0direct
PyPIxlrd2.0.2direct
PyPIalabaster1.0.0indirect
PyPIaudioop-lts0.2.2indirect
PyPIbabel2.18.0indirect
PyPIcabarchive0.2.5indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.6.17indirect
PyPIcffi2.0.0indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.7indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcolorclass2.2.2indirect
PyPIcompressed-rtf1.0.7indirect
PyPIcryptography50.0.0indirect
PyPIcx-freeze8.6.4indirect
PyPIdefusedxml0.7.1indirect
PyPIdmgbuild1.6.7indirect
PyPIdocutils0.21.2indirect
PyPIdocutils0.22.4indirect
PyPIds-store1.3.3indirect
PyPIeasygui0.98.3indirect
PyPIebcdic1.1.1indirect
PyPIet-xmlfile2.0.0indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.3.1indirect
PyPIfilelock3.29.5indirect
PyPIfreeze-core0.6.1indirect
PyPIidna3.18indirect
PyPIimagesize2.0.0indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPIlark1.3.1indirect
PyPIlief0.17.6indirect
PyPImac-alias2.2.3indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.3indirect
PyPImsoffcrypto-tool6.0.0indirect
PyPInodeenv1.10.0indirect
PyPIolefile0.47indirect
PyPIoletools0.60.2indirect
PyPIpackaging26.2indirect
PyPIpatchelf0.17.2.4indirect
PyPIpcodedmp1.2.6indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpocketsphinx5.1.1indirect
PyPIpycparser3.0indirect
PyPIpygments2.20.0indirect
PyPIpyparsing3.3.2indirect
PyPIpyright1.1.411indirect
PyPIpytest9.1.1indirect
PyPIpython-msilib0.6.0indirect
PyPIred-black-tree-mod1.22indirect
PyPIrequests2.34.2indirect
PyPIroman-numerals4.1.0indirect
PyPIrtfde0.1.2.2indirect
PyPIruff0.16.0indirect
PyPIsetuptools82.0.1indirect
PyPIsnowballstemmer3.1.1indirect
PyPIsounddevice0.5.5indirect
PyPIsoupsieve2.8.4indirect
PyPIsphinx8.1.3indirect
PyPIsphinx9.0.4indirect
PyPIsphinx9.1.0indirect
PyPIsphinx-argparse0.6.0indirect
PyPIsphinx-rtd-theme3.1.0indirect
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
PyPIstandard-aifc3.13.0indirect
PyPIstandard-chunk3.13.0indirect
PyPIstriprtf0.0.32indirect
PyPItextract2.0.0indirect
PyPItomli2.4.1indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.16.0indirect
PyPItzdata2026.2indirect
PyPItzlocal5.4.4indirect
PyPIurllib32.7.0indirect
PyPIwin-unicode-console0.5indirect
PyPIxlsxwriter3.2.9indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:textract@2.0.0 pulls in 34 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 v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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