Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-19 21:52 UTC

googlefonts / gftools

Misc tools for working with the Google Fonts library

PythonApache-2.0★ 286 stars⑂ 73 forkssince Oct 2017View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined
#google-fonts#fonts

googlefonts/gftools holds a health index of 90 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (92/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (42/100). It was last updated 3 days ago. A single contributor accounts 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

Google FontsOrganization
1,907 followers690 public repossince Jan 2014

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPIgftools0.10.47,3231543 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

92Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

87Excellent
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 3 days ago
22.8/36Commit cadence — 33/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 191 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year191
human_commit_share0.98
days_since_last_push3
active_weeks_last_year33

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 3 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~9.5 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv0.10.4
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release3
mean_days_between_releases9.5
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?

57Moderate · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

63Moderate
How it's scored
39.8/60Stars — 286 stars
15.5/25Forks — 73 forks
8.1/15Watchers — 30 watchers
Inputs used
forks73
stars286
watchers30
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

50Moderate
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
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_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

72Good · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

42Weak
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
9.7/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 57% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 44 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 35 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled44
top_contributor_share0.571

Issue & PR responsiveness

80Excellent
How it's scored
30.6/42Issue resolution — 73% of issues closed
26.9/30PR acceptance — 643/716 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
12/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 14/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
merged_prs643
open_issues128
closed_issues343
prs_merged_7d7
prs_decided_7d8
prs_merged_30d15
prs_decided_30d16
issue_closed_ratio0.728
closed_unmerged_prs73
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

79Good
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
23.6/25Owner reach — 1,907 followers of googlefonts
25/25Track record — 690 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers1,907
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_logingooglefonts
public_repos690
account_age_days4,653

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 3 days ago
20/20Version history — 154 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesgftools
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish3

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

83Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

82Excellent
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.black])
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
18/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 18 out of 19 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

85Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 2 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsgoogle-fonts, fonts
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

78Good · 16% of overall

Security posture

73Good
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.2/2.5CI-Tests — 18 out of 19 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6/7.5Code-Review — Found 14/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 35 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
1.5/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 3
4.5/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 9
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
6.8/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate7.3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): 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
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages83
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:gftools@0.10.4 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 83 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.

42Weak · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

32At Risk
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
31.6/40Legible commit history — 58 of 98 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.592
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

44Weak
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.black])
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 2 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.02

Code legibility for models

55Moderate
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
54.7/55Manageable file sizes — 1/172 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes61,465
source_files_sampled172
oversized_source_files1

Key facts

286GitHub stars
44contributors
191commits, last 12 months
3days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
128open 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 ★ / 73 ⇿
0Stars
73Forks
88Releases

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.

01325385063757232017-102021-122026-03
Major 0Minor 0Patch 88

Each point covers 8 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.3 / 10
7.3aggregate

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 · 2026-10-19 21:51 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
9CI-Tests18 out of 19 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
8Code-ReviewFound 14/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
10Contributorsproject has 35 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 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
3Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 3
9SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 9
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
9Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 37
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIFontTools>=4.60.0pyproject.toml
PyPIaxisregistry>=0.4.19pyproject.toml
PyPIabsl-py—pyproject.toml
PyPIglyphsLib—pyproject.toml
PyPIgflanguages>=0.7.8pyproject.toml
PyPIgfsubsets>=2024.02.05pyproject.toml
PyPIglyphsets>=0.6.13pyproject.toml
PyPIPyGithub—pyproject.toml
PyPIpillow—pyproject.toml
PyPIgfmetadata—pyproject.toml
PyPIprotobuf>=6.33.0pyproject.toml
PyPIrequests—pyproject.toml
PyPItabulate—pyproject.toml
PyPIunidecode—pyproject.toml
PyPIopentype-sanitizer—pyproject.toml
PyPIvttlib—pyproject.toml
PyPIpygit2>=1.16.0pyproject.toml
PyPIstrictyaml—pyproject.toml
PyPIfontmake>=3.3.0pyproject.toml
PyPIPyYAML—pyproject.toml
PyPIttfautohint-py—pyproject.toml
PyPIbrotli—pyproject.toml
PyPIjinja2—pyproject.toml
PyPIfontFeatures—pyproject.toml
PyPIvharfbuzz—pyproject.toml
PyPInanoemoji>=0.15.0pyproject.toml
PyPIbeautifulsoup4—pyproject.toml
PyPIrich—pyproject.toml
PyPIpackaging—pyproject.toml
PyPIninja—pyproject.toml
PyPInetworkx—pyproject.toml
PyPIruamel.yaml—pyproject.toml
PyPIffmpeg-python—pyproject.toml
PyPIufomerge>=1.8.1pyproject.toml
PyPItomli—pyproject.toml
PyPIfilelock>=3.20.3pyproject.toml
PyPIGitPython—pyproject.toml
All dependencies 15

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 11 direct and 4 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIaxisregistry—direct
PyPIfilelock—direct
PyPIfontmake—direct
PyPIfonttools—direct
PyPIgflanguages—direct
PyPIgfsubsets—direct
PyPIglyphsets—direct
PyPInanoemoji—direct
PyPIprotobuf—direct
PyPIpygit2—direct
PyPIufomerge—direct
PyPIblack24.10.0indirect
PyPIgftools—indirect
PyPIsetuptools—indirect
PyPIsetuptools-scm—indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:gftools@0.10.4 pulls in 83 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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with googlefonts/gftools. Read them side by side →

86torchfont/torchfontA Machine Learning Library for Vector FontsExcellent92fontsource/fontsourceSelf-host Open Source fonts in neatly bundled NPM packages.Excellent71feat-agency/vite-plugin-webfont-dl⚡ Webfont Download Vite Plugin - Effortlessly download and bundle webfonts in your Vite project. Enjoy privacy-first - even offline - development with persistent caching and non-render blocking font injection for optimal performance.Good65AlexanderMattTurner/subfontCommand line tool to optimize your webfont loading. Aggressive subsetting based on your font use, self-hosting of Google fonts and preloadingGood50rishi-raj-jain/astro-font`astro-font` will automatically optimize your Custom Fonts, Local Fonts, Fonts over any CDN and Google fonts for performance.Moderate94fonttools/fonttoolsA library to manipulate font files from 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.