Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-05 02:29 UTC

subframe7536 / maple-font

Maple Mono: Open source monospace font with round corner, ligatures and Nerd-Font icons for IDE and terminal, fine-grained customization options. 带连字和控制台图标的圆角等宽字体,中英文宽度完美2:1,细粒度的自定义选项

PythonOFL-1.1★ 27,836 stars⑂ 1,146 forkssince Apr 2022View on GitHub ↗

subframe7536/maple-font holds a health index of 62 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Vitality (78/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (20/100). It was last updated 2 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

62
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.

62
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 58 is calibrated to 62 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

SongPersonal account
541 followers74 public repossince Feb 2021

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

78Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 2 days ago
19.4/36Commit cadence28/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume100 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained3 commit(s) and 26 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year100
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push2
active_weeks_last_year28
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases65 releases published
16.2/36Release recencylatest release 242 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~29.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count65
latest_release_tagv7.9
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release242
mean_days_between_releases29.3

Community & Adoption

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

74Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
60/60Stars27,836 stars
25/25Forks1,146 forks
9.8/15Watchers58 watchers
Inputs used
forks1,146
stars27,836
watchers58
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (OFL-1.1)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges7
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

54Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
1/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 96% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth16 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled16
top_contributor_share0.957
How it's scored
39.8/42Issue resolution95% of issues closed
21.2/30PR acceptance60/85 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance0/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
3/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 6/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
merged_prs60
open_issues31
closed_issues569
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d3
prs_decided_30d5
issue_closed_ratio0.948
closed_unmerged_prs25
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
19.7/25Owner reach541 followers of subframe7536
24/25Track record74 public repos, account ~5 yr old
Inputs used
followers541
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginsubframe7536
public_repos74
account_age_days2,010
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

40Weak · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows2 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests0 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsno
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://font.subf.dev
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics11 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsfont, monospace-font, ligatures, programming-ligatures, coding-font, programming-font, monospace, typeface, typography, opentype, variable-font
has_wikino
homepagehttps://font.subf.dev
docs_sitehttps://font.subf.dev
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

50Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests0 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1.5/7.5Code-ReviewFound 6/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained3 commit(s) and 26 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
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.
0/7.5Token-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_aggregate3.7
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
advisories5
affected_packages3
assessed_packages45
unassessed_packages2
affected_by_severityhigh 2, moderate 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 45 resolved dependencies against OSV. 2 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.

20At Risk · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
16.5/40Legible commit history31 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.31
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentDockerfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfiles
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePython without a type-check config
54.4/55Manageable file sizes1/91 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes61,976
source_files_sampled91
oversized_source_files1

Key facts

27,836GitHub stars
16contributors
100commits, last 12 months
2days since last push
65releases
1bus factor
31open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Could not fetch pypi package 'maple-font' from its registry

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 1,146 ⇿
0Stars
1,146Forks
9Releases

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.

02004006008001,0001,2001,146382025-032025-112026-08
Major 0Minor 0Patch 0

Each point covers 2 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.7 / 10
3.7aggregate

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 · 2026-08-05 02:29 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2Code-ReviewFound 6/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
10Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained3 commit(s) and 26 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not 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.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7Vulnerabilities3 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 5
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIfoundrytools-cli==2.1.1pyproject.toml
PyPIglyphslib==6.12.7pyproject.toml
PyPIpython-minifier==3.1.0pyproject.toml
PyPIskia-pathops==0.9.2pyproject.toml
PyPItyping-extensions==4.15.0pyproject.toml
All dependencies 47

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 5 direct and 42 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIfoundrytools-cli2.1.1direct
PyPIglyphslib6.12.7direct
PyPIpython-minifier3.1.0direct
PyPIskia-pathops0.9.2direct
PyPItyping-extensions4.15.0direct
PyPIafdkoindirect
PyPIafdko5.0.0indirect
PyPIattrs26.1.0indirect
PyPIbooleanoperations0.10.0indirect
PyPIbrotli1.2.0indirect
PyPIbrotlicffi1.2.0.1indirect
PyPIcffi2.0.0indirect
PyPIcffsubr0.4.0indirect
PyPIclick8.3.2indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIdefcon0.12.2indirect
PyPIdehinter4.0.0indirect
PyPIfontfeatures1.9.0indirect
PyPIfontmath0.10.0indirect
PyPIfontparts0.14.1indirect
PyPIfontpens0.2.4indirect
PyPIfonttools4.62.1indirect
PyPIfoundrytools0.1.6indirect
PyPIloguru0.7.3indirect
PyPIlxml6.0.2indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py4.0.0indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImutatormath3.0.1indirect
PyPIopenstep-plist0.5.2indirect
PyPIpathvalidate3.3.1indirect
PyPIpyclipper1.4.0indirect
PyPIpycparser3.0indirect
PyPIpygments2.20.0indirect
PyPIrich14.3.3indirect
PyPIsetuptools82.0.1indirect
PyPItqdm4.67.3indirect
PyPIttfautohint-pyindirect
PyPIttfautohint-py0.6.0indirect
PyPIufo-extractor0.8.1indirect
PyPIufo2ft3.7.1indirect
PyPIufolib20.18.1indirect
PyPIufonormalizer0.6.3indirect
PyPIufoprocessor1.14.1indirect
PyPIunicodedata217.0.1indirect
PyPIwin32-setctime1.2.0indirect
PyPIxattr1.3.0indirect
PyPIzopfli0.4.1indirect
Dependency advisories 3

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 45 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 3 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 2 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
click8.3.2indirecthigh18.3.3
lxml6.0.2indirecthigh26.1.0
setuptools82.0.1indirectmoderate283.0.0

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.

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 v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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