Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-11 05:41 UTC

nextjournal / markdown

A cross-platform Clojure/Script parser for Markdown

ClojureISC★ 97 stars⑂ 11 forkssince Apr 2022View on GitHub ↗

nextjournal/markdown holds a health index of 54 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (66/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (32/100). It was last updated 43 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

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.

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)

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 53 is calibrated to 54 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

nextjournalOrganization · verified domain

109 followers189 public repossince Apr 2016

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

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

52Moderate · 21% of overall

Development activity

35Weak

How it's scored

18/36	Push recency — last push 43 days ago
3.5/36	Commit cadence — 5/52 weeks with commits
13.9/18	Commit volume — 34 commits in the last year
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 1 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

commits_last_year	34
human_commit_share	1
days_since_last_push	43
active_weeks_last_year	5

Release discipline

78Good

How it's scored

16.2/27	Ships releases — 25 version tags (no GitHub releases)
27/36	Release recency — latest release 161 days ago
27/27	Release cadence — a release every ~32.8 days
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data

Inputs used

releases_count	25
latest_release_tag	v0.7.225
releases_from_tags	yes
days_since_latest_release	161
mean_days_between_releases	32.8

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?

48Weak · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

46Weak

How it's scored

32.2/60	Stars — 97 stars
8.3/25	Forks — 11 forks
5.3/15	Watchers — 10 watchers

Inputs used

forks	11
stars	97
watchers	10
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

50Moderate

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
22.5/22.5	License — recognized license (ISC)
0/18	CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5	Code of conduct
0/7.2	Issue template
0/6.3	PR template

Inputs used

has_readme	yes
has_license	yes
readme_badges	2
has_contributing	no
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	no
readme_badge_services	shields.io
has_pull_request_template	no

Sustainability & Governance

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

66Good · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

38Weak

How it's scored

9/54	Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
9.9/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 56% of commits
9.5/13.5	Contributor breadth — 7 contributors
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 7 contributing companies or organizations

Inputs used

bus_factor	1
contributors_sampled	7
top_contributor_share	0.561

Issue & PR responsiveness

74Good

How it's scored

37.3/42	Issue resolution — 89% of issues closed
25.7/30	PR acceptance — 42/49 decided PRs merged
0/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
1.5/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 5/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1

Inputs used

merged_prs	42
open_issues	2
closed_issues	16
prs_merged_7d	0
prs_decided_7d	0
prs_merged_30d	0
prs_decided_30d	0
issue_closed_ratio	0.889
closed_unmerged_prs	7
first_time_authors_30d	0
first_time_prs_merged_30d	0
first_time_prs_decided_30d	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

90Excellent

How it's scored

30/30	Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20	Verified domain
14.7/25	Owner reach — 109 followers of nextjournal
25/25	Track record — 189 public repos, account ~10 yr old

Inputs used

followers	109
owner_type	Organization
is_verified	yes
owner_login	nextjournal
public_repos	189
account_age_days	3,793

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

58Moderate · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

64Moderate

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
0/16	Linter config
0/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4	.editorconfig
16/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 8 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8

Inputs used

has_ci	yes
has_tests	yes
has_editorconfig	no
has_linter_config	no
has_precommit_config	no

Documentation

50Moderate

How it's scored

30/30	README
0/25	Documentation directory
0/15	Documentation / homepage site
10/10	Repository description
10/10	Topics — 3 topics
0/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	clojure, clojurescript, markdown
has_wiki	no
homepage	—
docs_site	—
has_readme	yes
has_docs_dir	no
has_description	yes

Security

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

38Weak · 16% of overall

Security posture

29At Risk

How it's scored

6.8/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — binaries present in source code
0/7.5	Branch-Protection — no data
2/2.5	CI-Tests — 8 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0.8/7.5	Code-Review — Found 5/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
2.5/2.5	Contributors — project has 7 contributing companies or organizations
10/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5	Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5	Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5	License — license file detected
0/7.5	Maintained — 1 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
0/5	Packaging — no data
0/5	Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5	SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5	Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5	Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5	Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 20 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	15
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	3
scorecard_aggregate	2.9

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

74Good

How it's scored

20.2/35	Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: markdown-it 14.1.0 (moderate 5.3)
0/25	Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
35.3/40	No advisories left outstanding — 1 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 210 days ago

Inputs used

source	osv
advisories	21
affected_packages	11
assessed_packages	142
unassessed_packages	0
affected_by_severity	critical 2, high 5, moderate 4
direct_affected_packages	1

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 142 resolved dependencies against OSV. 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.

32At Risk · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

20At Risk

How it's scored

0/45	Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
19.7/40	Legible commit history — 37 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	no
llms_txt_url	—
legible_history_share	0.37
agent_instruction_files	—
agent_instruction_max_bytes	—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

32At Risk

How it's scored

0/18	One-command bootstrap
22/22	Automated tests
0/11	Lint / format config
0/11	Static type checking
10/10	Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10	Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8	Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

has_nix	no
has_tests	yes
lockfiles	yarn.lock
has_dockerfile	no
typed_language	no
bootstrap_files	—
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	no
typecheck_configs	—
agent_commit_share	0
toolchain_manifests	—
dependency_bot_commit_share	0

Code legibility for models

55Moderate

How it's scored

0/45	Type-checkable code — Clojure without a type-check config
55/55	Manageable file sizes — 0/3 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	Clojure
largest_source_bytes	12,450
source_files_sampled	3
oversized_source_files	0

Key facts

97GitHub stars

7contributors

34commits, last 12 months

43days since last push

25releases

1bus factor

2open issues

npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 11 ⇿

0Stars

11Forks

13Releases

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.

Major 0Minor 0Patch 13

Each point covers 3 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 2.9 / 10

2.9aggregate

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 · 2026-09-11 05:41 UTC

9	Binary-Artifacts	binaries present in source code
n/a	Branch-Protection	internal error: error during branchesHandler.setup: internal error: some github tokens can't read classic branch protection rules: https://github.com/ossf/scorecard-action/blob/main/docs/authentication/fine-grained-auth-token.md
8	CI-Tests	8 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0	CII-Best-Practices	no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1	Code-Review	Found 5/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
10	Contributors	project has 7 contributing companies or organizations
10	Dangerous-Workflow	no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0	Dependency-Update-Tool	no update tool detected
0	Fuzzing	project is not fuzzed
10	License	license file detected
0	Maintained	1 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
n/a	Packaging	packaging workflow not detected
0	Pinned-Dependencies	dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0	SAST	SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0	Security-Policy	security policy file not detected
n/a	Signed-Releases	no releases found
0	Token-Permissions	detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0	Vulnerabilities	20 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 30

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
npm	@codemirror/autocomplete	`^6.0.2`	package.json
npm	@codemirror/commands	`^6.0.0`	package.json
npm	@codemirror/lang-markdown	`6.0.0`	package.json
npm	@codemirror/language	`^6.1.0`	package.json
npm	@codemirror/lint	`^6.0.0`	package.json
npm	@codemirror/search	`^6.0.0`	package.json
npm	@codemirror/state	`^6.0.1`	package.json
npm	@codemirror/view	`^6.0.2`	package.json
npm	@lezer/common	`^1.0.0`	package.json
npm	@lezer/generator	`^1.0.0`	package.json
npm	@lezer/highlight	`^1.0.0`	package.json
npm	@lezer/lr	`^1.0.0`	package.json
npm	@lezer/markdown	`^1.0.0`	package.json
npm	@nextjournal/lang-clojure	`1.0.0`	package.json
npm	@nextjournal/lezer-clojure	`1.0.0`	package.json
npm	d3-require	`^1.2.4`	package.json
npm	emoji-regex	`^10.0.0`	package.json
npm	framer-motion	`^6.2.8`	package.json
npm	lezer-clojure	`1.0.0-rc.0`	package.json
npm	markdown-it	`^14.1.0`	package.json
npm	markdown-it-block-image	`^0.0.3`	package.json
npm	markdown-it-footnote	`^3.0.3`	package.json
npm	markdown-it-texmath	`^1.0.0`	package.json
npm	markdown-it-toc-done-right	`^4.2.0`	package.json
npm	punycode	`2.1.1`	package.json
npm	react	`^18.2.0`	package.json
npm	react-dom	`^18.2.0`	package.json
npm	use-sync-external-store	`1.2.0`	package.json
npm	vh-sticky-table-header	`1.2.1`	package.json
npm	w3c-keyname	`^2.2.4`	package.json

All dependencies 142

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 32 direct and 110 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
npm	@codemirror/autocomplete	`6.0.2`	direct
npm	@codemirror/commands	`6.0.1`	direct
npm	@codemirror/lang-markdown	`6.0.0`	direct
npm	@codemirror/language	`6.2.0`	direct
npm	@codemirror/lint	`6.0.0`	direct
npm	@codemirror/search	`6.0.0`	direct
npm	@codemirror/state	`6.1.0`	direct
npm	@codemirror/view	`6.0.2`	direct
npm	@lezer/common	`1.0.0`	direct
npm	@lezer/generator	`1.1.0`	direct
npm	@lezer/highlight	`1.0.0`	direct
npm	@lezer/lr	`1.1.0`	direct
npm	@lezer/markdown	`1.0.1`	direct
npm	@nextjournal/lang-clojure	`1.0.0`	direct
npm	@nextjournal/lezer-clojure	`1.0.0`	direct
npm	d3-require	`1.3.0`	direct
npm	emoji-regex	`10.1.0`	direct
npm	framer-motion	`6.3.11`	direct
npm	lezer-clojure	`1.0.0-rc.0`	direct
npm	markdown-it	`14.1.0`	direct
npm	markdown-it-block-image	`0.0.3`	direct
npm	markdown-it-footnote	`3.0.3`	direct
npm	markdown-it-texmath	`1.0.0`	direct
npm	markdown-it-toc-done-right	`4.2.0`	direct
npm	punycode	`1.3.2`	direct
npm	punycode	`1.4.1`	direct
npm	punycode	`2.1.1`	direct
npm	react	`18.2.0`	direct
npm	react-dom	`18.2.0`	direct
npm	use-sync-external-store	`1.2.0`	direct
npm	vh-sticky-table-header	`1.2.1`	direct
npm	w3c-keyname	`2.2.4`	direct
npm	@codemirror/lang-css	`6.0.0`	indirect
npm	@codemirror/lang-html	`6.1.0`	indirect
npm	@codemirror/lang-javascript	`6.0.1`	indirect
npm	@emotion/is-prop-valid	`0.8.8`	indirect
npm	@emotion/memoize	`0.7.4`	indirect
npm	@lezer/css	`1.0.0`	indirect
npm	@lezer/html	`1.0.0`	indirect
npm	@lezer/javascript	`1.0.1`	indirect
npm	argparse	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	asn1.js	`5.4.1`	indirect
npm	assert	`1.5.0`	indirect
npm	base64-js	`1.5.1`	indirect
npm	bn.js	`4.12.0`	indirect
npm	bn.js	`5.2.1`	indirect
npm	brorand	`1.1.0`	indirect
npm	browserify-aes	`1.2.0`	indirect
npm	browserify-cipher	`1.0.1`	indirect
npm	browserify-des	`1.0.2`	indirect
npm	browserify-rsa	`4.1.0`	indirect
npm	browserify-sign	`4.2.1`	indirect
npm	browserify-zlib	`0.2.0`	indirect
npm	buffer	`4.9.2`	indirect
npm	buffer-xor	`1.0.3`	indirect
npm	builtin-status-codes	`3.0.0`	indirect
npm	cipher-base	`1.0.4`	indirect
npm	console-browserify	`1.2.0`	indirect
npm	constants-browserify	`1.0.0`	indirect
npm	core-util-is	`1.0.3`	indirect
npm	create-ecdh	`4.0.4`	indirect
npm	create-hash	`1.2.0`	indirect
npm	create-hmac	`1.1.7`	indirect
npm	crelt	`1.0.5`	indirect
npm	crypto-browserify	`3.12.0`	indirect
npm	des.js	`1.0.1`	indirect
npm	diffie-hellman	`5.0.3`	indirect
npm	domain-browser	`1.2.0`	indirect
npm	elliptic	`6.5.4`	indirect
npm	entities	`4.5.0`	indirect
npm	esbuild	`0.12.29`	indirect
npm	events	`3.3.0`	indirect
npm	evp_bytestokey	`1.0.3`	indirect
npm	framesync	`6.0.1`	indirect
npm	hash-base	`3.1.0`	indirect
npm	hash.js	`1.1.7`	indirect
npm	hey-listen	`1.0.8`	indirect
npm	hmac-drbg	`1.0.1`	indirect
npm	https-browserify	`1.0.0`	indirect
npm	ieee754	`1.2.1`	indirect
npm	inherits	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	inherits	`2.0.3`	indirect
npm	inherits	`2.0.4`	indirect
npm	isarray	`1.0.0`	indirect
npm	isexe	`2.0.0`	indirect
npm	js-tokens	`4.0.0`	indirect
npm	linkify-it	`5.0.0`	indirect
npm	loose-envify	`1.4.0`	indirect
npm	md5.js	`1.3.5`	indirect
npm	mdurl	`2.0.0`	indirect
npm	miller-rabin	`4.0.1`	indirect
npm	minimalistic-assert	`1.0.1`	indirect
npm	minimalistic-crypto-utils	`1.0.1`	indirect
npm	node-libs-browser	`2.2.1`	indirect
npm	object-assign	`4.1.1`	indirect
npm	os-browserify	`0.3.0`	indirect
npm	pako	`1.0.11`	indirect
npm	parse-asn1	`5.1.6`	indirect
npm	path-browserify	`0.0.1`	indirect
npm	pbkdf2	`3.1.2`	indirect
npm	popmotion	`11.0.3`	indirect
npm	process	`0.11.10`	indirect
npm	process-nextick-args	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	public-encrypt	`4.0.3`	indirect
npm	punycode.js	`2.3.1`	indirect
npm	querystring	`0.2.0`	indirect
npm	querystring-es3	`0.2.1`	indirect
npm	randombytes	`2.1.0`	indirect
npm	randomfill	`1.0.4`	indirect
npm	readable-stream	`2.3.7`	indirect
npm	readable-stream	`3.6.0`	indirect
npm	readline-sync	`1.4.10`	indirect
npm	ripemd160	`2.0.2`	indirect
npm	safe-buffer	`5.1.2`	indirect
npm	safe-buffer	`5.2.1`	indirect
npm	safer-buffer	`2.1.2`	indirect
npm	scheduler	`0.23.0`	indirect
npm	setimmediate	`1.0.5`	indirect
npm	sha.js	`2.4.11`	indirect
npm	shadow-cljs	`2.19.3`	indirect
npm	shadow-cljs-jar	`1.3.2`	indirect
npm	source-map	`0.5.7`	indirect
npm	source-map-support	`0.4.18`	indirect
npm	stream-browserify	`2.0.2`	indirect
npm	stream-http	`2.8.3`	indirect
npm	string_decoder	`1.1.1`	indirect
npm	string_decoder	`1.3.0`	indirect
npm	style-mod	`4.0.0`	indirect
npm	style-value-types	`5.0.0`	indirect
npm	timers-browserify	`2.0.12`	indirect
npm	to-arraybuffer	`1.0.1`	indirect
npm	tslib	`2.4.0`	indirect
npm	tty-browserify	`0.0.0`	indirect
npm	uc.micro	`2.1.0`	indirect
npm	url	`0.11.0`	indirect
npm	util	`0.10.3`	indirect
npm	util	`0.11.1`	indirect
npm	util-deprecate	`1.0.2`	indirect
npm	vm-browserify	`1.1.2`	indirect
npm	which	`1.3.1`	indirect
npm	ws	`7.5.8`	indirect
npm	xtend	`4.0.2`	indirect

Dependency advisories 11

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 142 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 11 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct.

Package	Version	Relation	Severity	Advisories	Fixed in
cipher-base	`1.0.4`	indirect	critical	1	`1.0.5`
sha.js	`2.4.11`	indirect	critical	1	`2.4.12`
browserify-sign	`4.2.1`	indirect	high	1	`4.2.2`
elliptic	`6.5.4`	indirect	high	7	`6.6.1`
linkify-it	`5.0.0`	indirect	high	2	`5.0.2`
pbkdf2	`3.1.2`	indirect	high	2	`3.1.3`
ws	`7.5.8`	indirect	high	2	`8.21.0`
markdown-it	`14.1.0`	direct	moderate	2	`14.2.0`
bn.js	`4.12.0`	indirect	moderate	1	`5.2.3`
bn.js	`5.2.1`	indirect	moderate	1	`5.2.3`
esbuild	`0.12.29`	indirect	moderate	1	`0.25.0`

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.

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.

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Metrics by category

Key facts

Data collection warnings

More detail

Feedback

Related records