Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-28 04:47 UTC

github / markup

Determines which markup library to use to render a content file (e.g. README) on GitHub

Ruby · PythonMIT★ 6,045 stars⑂ 3,375 forkssince Oct 2009View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

github/markup holds a health index of 90 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (94/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (49/100). It was last updated 29 days ago. 4 contributors account for most of its recent work.

90
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.

90
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 76 is calibrated to 90 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

GitHubOrganization · verified domain
84,326 followers558 public repossince May 2008

This repository is backed by an organization — shared, accountable stewardship that can outlive any single maintainer.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
RubyGemsgithub-markup6.0.0-66115 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

69Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recencylast push 29 days ago
13.8/36Commit cadence20/52 weeks with commits
17.8/18Commit volume95 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year95
human_commit_share0.67
days_since_last_push29
active_weeks_last_year20
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases22 releases published
27/36Release recencylatest release 115 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~306.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count22
latest_release_tagv6.0.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release115
mean_days_between_releases306.6

Community & Adoption

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

94Exceptional · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

100Exceptional
How it's scored
60/60Stars6,045 stars
25/25Forks3,375 forks
15/15Watchers613 watchers
Inputs used
forks3,375
stars6,045
watchers613
growth_stateorganic
growth_factor_pct100

Community health

85Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code 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_conductyes
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
77.8/80Total downloads30,981,736 downloads all-time across rubygems
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesgithub-markup
dependents
ecosystemsrubygems
total_downloads30,981,736
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?

86Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
43.2/54Bus factor4 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
19/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 16% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth91 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 62 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor4
contributors_sampled91
top_contributor_share0.155
How it's scored
41.2/42Issue resolution98% of issues closed
15/30PR acceptance210/420 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance0/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
4.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 1/3 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
merged_prs210
open_issues21
closed_issues1,170
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio0.982
closed_unmerged_prs210
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
20/20Verified domain
25/25Owner reach84,326 followers of github
25/25Track record558 public repos, account ~18 yr old
Inputs used
followers84,326
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_logingithub
public_repos558
account_age_days6,683

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on rubygems
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 115 days ago
20/20Version history66 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesgithub-markup
ecosystemsrubygems
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish115

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

67Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests17 out of 17 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://www.rubydoc.info/gems/github-markup/6.0.0
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics1 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsreadme
has_wikino
homepage
docs_sitehttps://www.rubydoc.info/gems/github-markup/6.0.0
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

72Good · 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
2.5/2.5CI-Tests17 out of 17 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2.2/7.5Code-ReviewFound 1/3 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 62 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
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
2/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 4
5/5SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
6.8/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities12 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate6.5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging. 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
advisories12
affected_packages3
assessed_packages55
unassessed_packages8
affected_by_severityhigh 1, moderate 1, 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 55 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.

49Weak · 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 history67 of 67 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share1
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice32 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance33 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
4/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesGemfile.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0.32
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.33
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codeRuby without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/11 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRuby
largest_source_bytes14,547
source_files_sampled11
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

6,045GitHub stars
91contributors
95commits, last 12 months
29days since last push
22releases
4bus factor
21open issues
RubyGemspackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Star history carried forward from 2026-07-20: GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository admins, so it can no longer be collected. The repository has 6045 stars today.

More detail

Star and fork history 6,037 ★ / 3,375 ⇿
6,037Stars
3,375Forks
17Releases

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.

Only the most recent history is shown — this repository exceeds the collection window, so the earliest history is not captured.

Star history is shown as collected on 2026-07-20. GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository administrators in July 2026, so this series can no longer be extended; the current star total above remains live.

1,2502,5003,7505,0006,2506,0373,375162017-032021-112026-08
Major 4Minor 3Patch 10

Each point covers 9 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.5 / 10
6.5aggregate

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 · 2026-08-28 04:47 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests17 out of 17 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3Code-ReviewFound 1/3 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
10Contributorsproject has 62 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
4Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 4
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
9Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities12 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 11
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
RubyGemsredcarpetGemfile
RubyGemskramdownGemfile
RubyGemsRedClothGemfile
RubyGemscommonmarker~> 2.8.2Gemfile
RubyGemsrdoc~> 7.2.0Gemfile
RubyGemsorg-ruby0.9.12Gemfile
RubyGemscreole~>0.5.0Gemfile
RubyGemswikicloth=0.8.3Gemfile
RubyGemstwitter-text~> 1.14Gemfile
RubyGemsasciidoctor~> 2.0.26Gemfile
RubyGemsrexmlGemfile
All dependencies 63

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 10 direct and 53 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
RubyGemsasciidoctor2.0.26direct
RubyGemscommonmarker2.8.2direct
RubyGemscreole0.5.0direct
RubyGemsorg-ruby0.9.12direct
RubyGemsrdoc7.2.0direct
RubyGemsredcarpet3.6.1direct
RubyGemsRedCloth4.3.4direct
RubyGemsrexml3.4.4direct
RubyGemstwitter-text1.14.7direct
RubyGemswikicloth0.8.3direct
RubyGemsactivesupportindirect
RubyGemsactivesupport8.1.3indirect
RubyGemsbase640.3.0indirect
RubyGemsbigdecimal4.1.2indirect
RubyGemsbuilder3.3.0indirect
RubyGemscgi0.5.1indirect
RubyGemscharlock_holmes0.7.9indirect
RubyGemsconcurrent-ruby1.3.6indirect
RubyGemsconnection_pool3.0.2indirect
RubyGemsdate3.5.1indirect
RubyGemsdocile1.4.1indirect
RubyGemsdrb2.2.3indirect
RubyGemserb6.0.4indirect
RubyGemsexpression_parser0.9.0indirect
RubyGemsgithub-linguistindirect
RubyGemsgithub-linguist9.5.0indirect
RubyGemshtml-pipelineindirect
RubyGemshtml-pipeline3.2.4indirect
RubyGemshtmlentities4.3.4indirect
RubyGemsi18n1.14.8indirect
RubyGemsjson2.19.5indirect
RubyGemslogger1.7.0indirect
RubyGemsmini_mime1.1.5indirect
RubyGemsmini_portile22.8.9indirect
RubyGemsminitestindirect
RubyGemsminitest6.0.6indirect
RubyGemsnokogiriindirect
RubyGemsnokogiri1.19.3indirect
RubyGemsnokogiri-diffindirect
RubyGemsnokogiri-diff0.3.0indirect
RubyGemsprism1.9.0indirect
RubyGemspsych5.3.1indirect
RubyGemsracc1.8.1indirect
RubyGemsrakeindirect
RubyGemsrake13.4.2indirect
RubyGemsrake-compiler-dock1.12.0indirect
RubyGemsrb_sys0.9.128indirect
RubyGemsrubypants0.7.1indirect
RubyGemsrugged1.9.0indirect
RubyGemssecurerandom0.4.1indirect
RubyGemsselma0.5.0indirect
RubyGemssimplecovindirect
RubyGemssimplecov0.22.0indirect
RubyGemssimplecov-html0.13.2indirect
RubyGemssimplecov_json_formatter0.1.4indirect
RubyGemsstringio3.2.0indirect
RubyGemstdiff0.4.0indirect
RubyGemstsort0.2.0indirect
RubyGemstzinfo2.0.6indirect
RubyGemsunf0.1.4indirect
RubyGemsunf_ext0.0.9.1indirect
RubyGemsuri1.1.1indirect
RubyGemszeitwerk2.8.2indirect
Dependency advisories 3

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 55 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 3 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
concurrent-ruby1.3.6indirecthigh31.3.7
nokogiri1.19.3indirectmoderate81.19.4
json2.19.5indirectlow12.19.9

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.