Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-14 21:16 UTC

domdfcoding / enum_tools

Tools to expand Python's enum module.

Python · HTMLLGPL-3.0★ 11 stars⑂ 9 forkssince Jun 2020View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryhow this is determined
#python3#enum#sphinx-extension#documentation#python#sphinx

domdfcoding/enum_tools holds a health index of 60 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (85/100) and lowest on Security (33/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

60
overall / 100
Moderate

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.

60
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 57 is calibrated to 60 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Dominic Davis-FosterPersonal account
49 followers230 public repossince Jul 2014

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
PyPIenum-tools0.13.0913,52823515 days agodocumentationenumsphinxsphinx-extension

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

56Moderate · 21% of overall

Development activity

59Moderate
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
5.5/36Commit cadence — 8/52 weeks with commits
11.3/18Commit volume — 17 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — no data
Inputs used
commits_last_year17
human_commit_share0.66
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year8

Release discipline

52Moderate
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 23 releases published
7.2/36Release recency — latest release 514 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~169.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count23
latest_release_tagv0.13.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release514
mean_days_between_releases169.9

Community & Adoption

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

59Moderate · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

24At Risk
How it's scored
16.2/60Stars — 11 stars
7.5/25Forks — 9 forks
0/15Watchers — 1 watchers
Inputs used
forks9
stars11
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

70Good
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (LGPL-3.0)
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

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

99Exceptional
How it's scored
79.5/80Monthly downloads — 913,528 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesenum-tools
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads913,528
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?

51Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

16Critical
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.3/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 99% of commits
5.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 4 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — no data
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled4
top_contributor_share0.986

Issue & PR responsiveness

63Moderate
How it's scored
22.9/42Issue resolution — 55% of issues closed
22.5/30PR acceptance — 78/104 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — no data
Inputs used
merged_prs78
open_issues10
closed_issues12
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.545
closed_unmerged_prs26
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

59Moderate
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
12.2/25Owner reach — 49 followers of domdfcoding
25/25Track record — 230 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers49
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_logindomdfcoding
public_repos230
account_age_days4,457
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

79Good
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
14/35Publish recency — latest publish 515 days ago
20/20Version history — 23 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesenum-tools
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish515

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

85Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

92Excellent
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 7 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .pylintrc, tox.ini
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

75Good
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://enum-tools.readthedocs.io/en/latest
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 6 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicspython3, enum, sphinx-extension, documentation, python, sphinx
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://enum-tools.readthedocs.io/en/latest
docs_sitehttps://enum-tools.readthedocs.io/en/latest
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

33At Risk · 16% of overall

Security posture

33At Risk
How it's scored
0/30Security policy (SECURITY.md)
25/25Dependabot config
0/25Dependency lockfiles — published library — lockfiles are an application concern, not expected
0/20CodeQL workflow
Inputs used
sourcefile_signals
lockfiles—
manifestsdoc-source/requirements.txt, pyproject.toml, requirements.txt, tests/requirements.txt
has_codeql_workflowno
has_security_policyno
has_dependabot_configyes
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Dependency lockfiles. 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.

50Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

3Critical
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
3.2/40Legible commit history — 4 of 66 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.061
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

74Good
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — justfile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .pylintrc, tox.ini
11/11Static type checking — enum_tools/py.typed
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
5/8Automated maintenance — dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesjustfile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsenum_tools/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0

Code legibility for models

82Excellent
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (enum_tools/py.typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/17 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes20,018
source_files_sampled17
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

11GitHub stars
4contributors
17commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
23releases
1bus factor
10open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • OSV advisory lookup failed: [Errno 101] Network is unreachable
  • OpenSSF Scorecard timed out after 240s; skipping Scorecard checks

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 9 ⇿
0Stars
9Forks
9Releases

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.

0246810922021-102024-022026-07
Major 0Minor 7Patch 1

Each point covers 5 days.

All dependencies 43

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 43 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIcoincidence—indirect
PyPIcoverage—indirect
PyPIcoverage-pyver-pragma—indirect
PyPIdefault-values—indirect
PyPIdefusedxml—indirect
PyPIdocutils—indirect
PyPIdomdf-python-tools—indirect
PyPIdomdf-sphinx-theme—indirect
PyPIextras-require—indirect
PyPIhtml-section—indirect
PyPIhtml5lib—indirect
PyPIimportlib-metadata—indirect
PyPIiniconfig—indirect
PyPImsgpack—indirect
PyPIpygments—indirect
PyPIpytest—indirect
PyPIpytest-cov—indirect
PyPIpytest-randomly—indirect
PyPIpytest-regressions—indirect
PyPIpytest-rerunfailures—indirect
PyPIpytest-timeout—indirect
PyPIroman—indirect
PyPIseed-intersphinx-mapping—indirect
PyPIsetuptools—indirect
PyPIsphinx—indirect
PyPIsphinx-copybutton—indirect
PyPIsphinx-debuginfo—indirect
PyPIsphinx-jinja2-compat—indirect
PyPIsphinx-licenseinfo—indirect
PyPIsphinx-notfound-page—indirect
PyPIsphinx-prompt—indirect
PyPIsphinx-pyproject—indirect
PyPIsphinx-toolbox—indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-applehelp1.0.4indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-devhelp1.0.2indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-htmlhelp2.0.1indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-httpdomain—indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-jsmath1.0.1indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-qthelp1.0.3indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-serializinghtml1.1.5indirect
PyPIsphinxemoji—indirect
PyPItoctree-plus—indirect
PyPItyping-extensions—indirect
Dependency advisories not assessed

Advisory matching could not run for this report: OSV advisory lookup failed: [Errno 101] Network is unreachable

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 domdfcoding/enum_tools. Read them side by side →

99astral-sh/ruffAn extremely fast Python linter and code formatter, written in Rust.Exceptional98neo4j/neo4j-graphrag-pythonNeo4j GraphRAG for PythonExceptional98bloomberg/memrayMemray is a memory profiler for PythonExceptional98neo4j/neo4j-python-driverNeo4j Bolt driver for PythonExceptional97CrowdStrike/falconpyThe CrowdStrike Falcon SDK for PythonExceptional97typeddjango/django-stubsPEP-484 stubs for DjangoExceptional

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.