Public record
Software health reportschema 0.27.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-30 22:01 UTC

sphinx-toolbox / extras_require

Display a warning at the top of module documentation that it has additional requirements.

Python · HTMLBSD-2-Clause★ 2 stars⑂ 1 forksince May 2020View on GitHub ↗

sphinx-toolbox/extras_require holds a health index of 54 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (80/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (33/100). It was last updated 24 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

54
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.

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

Ownership

sphinx-toolboxOrganization
6 followers25 public repossince Dec 2020

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIextras-require0.5.0-151203 days agodocumentationrequirementssphinxsphinx-extension

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

49Weak · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recencylast push 24 days ago
4.2/36Commit cadence6/52 weeks with commits
10.6/18Commit volume14 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained1 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year14
human_commit_share0.62
days_since_last_push24
active_weeks_last_year6
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases15 releases published
16.2/36Release recencylatest release 230 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~209.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count15
latest_release_tagv0.5.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release230
mean_days_between_releases209.3

Community & Adoption

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

33At Risk · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars2 stars
0/25Forks1 forks
0/15Watchers1 watchers
Inputs used
forks1
stars2
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (BSD-2-Clause)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

48Weak · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.1/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 100% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth2 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 8 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.996
How it's scored
10.5/42Issue resolution25% of issues closed
23.2/30PR acceptance75/97 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/22 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs75
open_issues3
closed_issues1
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.25
closed_unmerged_prs22
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
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
6.1/25Owner reach6 followers of sphinx-toolbox
21.6/25Track record25 public repos, account ~5 yr old
Inputs used
followers6
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginsphinx-toolbox
public_repos25
account_age_days2,056
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on pypi
4/35Publish recencylatest publish 1,203 days ago
20/20Version history15 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesextras-require
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish1,203

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

80Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows8 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.pylintrc, tox.ini
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
10/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests4 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://extras-require.readthedocs.io/en/latest
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics5 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicssphinx, sphinx-extension, requirements, documentation, python
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://extras-require.readthedocs.io/en/latest
docs_sitehttps://extras-require.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?

58Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
1.2/2.5CI-Tests4 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/22 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 8 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
0/7.5Maintained1 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
4.5/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
5.2/7.5Vulnerabilities3 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate4.7
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriesno indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages53
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:extras-require@0.5.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 53 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.

46Weak · 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 history0 of 62 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapjustfile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config.pylintrc, tox.ini
11/11Static type checkingsphinxcontrib/extras_require/py.typed
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
5/8Automated maintenancedependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesjustfile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configssphinxcontrib/extras_require/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable codePython with type-check config (sphinxcontrib/extras_require/py.typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/18 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes9,436
source_files_sampled18
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

2GitHub stars
2contributors
14commits, last 12 months
24days since last push
15releases
1bus factor
3open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.7 / 10
4.7aggregate

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 · 2026-07-30 22:01 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal 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
5CI-Tests4 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/22 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 8 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained1 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
6Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7Vulnerabilities3 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 41

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 41 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIbackports-entry-points-selectableindirect
PyPIbeautifulsoup4indirect
PyPIcoincidenceindirect
PyPIcoverageindirect
PyPIcoverage-pyver-pragmaindirect
PyPIdefault-valuesindirect
PyPIdefusedxmlindirect
PyPIdocutilsindirect
PyPIdomdf-python-toolsindirect
PyPIdomdf-sphinx-themeindirect
PyPIhtml-sectionindirect
PyPIimportlib-metadataindirect
PyPIpackagingindirect
PyPIpygmentsindirect
PyPIpytestindirect
PyPIpytest-covindirect
PyPIpytest-randomlyindirect
PyPIpytest-regressionsindirect
PyPIpytest-timeoutindirect
PyPIpytzindirect
PyPIromanindirect
PyPIseed-intersphinx-mappingindirect
PyPIsetuptoolsindirect
PyPIshippinglabelindirect
PyPIsphinxindirect
PyPIsphinx-copybuttonindirect
PyPIsphinx-debuginfoindirect
PyPIsphinx-licenseinfoindirect
PyPIsphinx-notfound-pageindirect
PyPIsphinx-promptindirect
PyPIsphinx-pyprojectindirect
PyPIsphinx-toolboxindirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-applehelp1.0.4indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-devhelp1.0.2indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-htmlhelp2.0.1indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-httpdomainindirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-jsmath1.0.1indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-qthelp1.0.3indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-serializinghtml1.1.5indirect
PyPIsphinxemojiindirect
PyPItoctree-plusindirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:extras-require@0.5.0 pulls in 53 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.

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 v0.27.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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