Public record
Software health reportschema 0.12.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-18 12:51 UTC

jdillard / sphinx-sitemap

Sphinx extension to generate a multi-lingual, multi-version sitemap for HTML builds

PythonMIT★ 62 stars⑂ 24 forkssince Aug 2017View on GitHub ↗

jdillard/sphinx-sitemap holds a health index of 71 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (95/100) and lowest on Security (33/100). It was last updated 4 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

71
overall / 100
Good

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.

71
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 63 is calibrated to 71 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Jared DillardPersonal account
90 followers41 public repossince Feb 2013@joby

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
PyPIsphinx-sitemap2.9.0643,63720285 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

63Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 4 days ago
5.5/36Commit cadence8/52 weeks with commits
11.1/18Commit volume16 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintainedno data
Inputs used
commits_last_year16
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push4
active_weeks_last_year8
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases20 releases published
16.2/36Release recencylatest release 285 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~113.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count20
latest_release_tagv2.9.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release285
mean_days_between_releases113.2

Community & Adoption

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

59Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
29/60Stars62 stars
11.3/25Forks24 forks
2.7/15Watchers4 watchers
Inputs used
forks24
stars62
watchers4
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_badges
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
77.4/80Monthly downloads643,637 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagessphinx-sitemap
dependents
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads
monthly_downloads643,637
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?

63Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
4.7/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 79% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth17 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsno data
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled17
top_contributor_share0.791
How it's scored
33/42Issue resolution79% of issues closed
28.1/30PR acceptance74/79 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Reviewno data
Inputs used
merged_prs74
open_issues9
closed_issues33
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.786
closed_unmerged_prs5
first_time_authors_30d
first_time_prs_merged_30d
first_time_prs_decided_30d
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
14.1/25Owner reach90 followers of jdillard
23.8/25Track record41 public repos, account ~13 yr old
Inputs used
followers90
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginjdillard
public_repos41
account_age_days4,911
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on pypi
26/35Publish recencylatest publish 285 days ago
20/20Version history20 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagessphinx-sitemap
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish285

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

95Exceptional · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configtox.ini
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Testsno data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://sphinx-sitemap.readthedocs.io/en/latest/index.html
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics3 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicssphinx-extension, conda-forge, sphinx
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://sphinx-sitemap.readthedocs.io/en/latest/index.html
docs_sitehttps://sphinx-sitemap.readthedocs.io/en/latest/index.html
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

33At Risk · 16% of overall
How it's scored
0/30Security policy (SECURITY.md)
25/25Dependabot config
0/25Dependency lockfilespublished library — lockfiles are an application concern, not expected
0/20CodeQL workflow
Inputs used
sourcefile_signals
lockfiles
manifestsdocs/requirements.txt, pyproject.toml, requirements_dev.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.

43Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapdocs/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format configtox.ini
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
5/8Automated maintenancedependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesno data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesdocs/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePython without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/6 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes9,338
source_files_sampled6
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

62GitHub stars
17contributors
16commits, last 12 months
4days since last push
20releases
1bus factor
9open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • OpenSSF Scorecard timed out after 240s; skipping Scorecard checks

More detail

Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIsphinx-last-updated-by-gitpyproject.toml
All dependencies 13

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 1 direct and 12 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIsphinx-last-updated-by-gitdirect
PyPIbuildindirect
PyPIesbonioindirect
PyPIflake8indirect
PyPIfuroindirect
PyPIpre-commitindirect
PyPIpytestindirect
PyPIsphinxindirect
PyPIsphinx-contributorsindirect
PyPIsphinx-sitemapindirect
PyPIsphinxemojiindirect
PyPIsphinxext-opengraphindirect
PyPItoxindirect
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 v0.12.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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