Public record
Software health reportschema 0.23.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-21 20:25 UTC

tinymce / tinymce-dist

Official TinyMCE repository for production usage in package managers

JavaScript · CSSCustom license★ 170 stars⑂ 158 forkssince May 2014View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryhow this is determined
#tinymce

tinymce/tinymce-dist holds a health index of 45 out of 100, placing it in the Weak band. It scores highest on Vitality (74/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (10/100). It was last updated 6 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

45
overall / 100
Weak

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.

45
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 47 is calibrated to 45 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

TinyOrganization
418 followers102 public repossince Aug 2009

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
npmtinymcepoints to another repo — not scored8.8.04,489,2412186 days agowysiwygtinymcerichtextjavascripthtmltextrich-editorrich-text-editorrterich-textcontenteditableediting
Packagisttinymce/tinymce8.8.0173,3522436 days agotextjavascriptwysiwygtinymcehtmleditingrichtextcontenteditablerterich-editorrich-text-editorrich-text

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

74Good · 21% of overall

Development activity

64Moderate
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 6 days ago
11.1/36Commit cadence — 16/52 weeks with commits
11.9/18Commit volume — 20 commits in the last year
5/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 6 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
commits_last_year20
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push6
active_weeks_last_year16

Release discipline

88Excellent
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases — 100 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recency — latest release 6 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~26.7 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tag8.8.0
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release6
mean_days_between_releases26.7
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?

61Moderate · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

62Moderate
How it's scored
36.1/60Stars — 170 stars
18.3/25Forks — 158 forks
7.6/15Watchers — 24 watchers
Inputs used
forks158
stars170
watchers24
growth_stateorganic
growth_factor_pct100

Community health

44Weak
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
16.9/22.5License — license file present, not a recognized license
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

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

84Excellent
How it's scored
69.9/80Monthly downloads — 173,352 downloads/month across packagist
13.8/20Registry dependents — 115 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagestinymce/tinymce
dependents115
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads8,167,016
monthly_downloads173,352
unverified_packages_excluded—

Sustainability & Governance

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

50Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

22At Risk
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.3/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 99% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth — 2 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.987

Issue & PR responsiveness

1Critical
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
0/30PR acceptance — 0/12 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs0
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d—
prs_decided_7d—
prs_merged_30d—
prs_decided_30d—
issue_closed_ratio—
closed_unmerged_prs12
first_time_authors_30d—
first_time_prs_merged_30d—
first_time_prs_decided_30d—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

92Excellent
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain — verified-domain status not read for this organization
18.9/25Owner reach — 418 followers of tinymce
25/25Track record — 102 public repos, account ~16 yr old
Inputs used
followers418
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified—
owner_logintinymce
public_repos102
account_age_days6,173
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on packagist
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 6 days ago
20/20Version history — 243 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagestinymce/tinymce
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish6

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

21At Risk · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

1Critical
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsno
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 1 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicstinymce
has_wikino
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

35Weak · 16% of overall

Security posture

35Weak
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
0/2.5CI-Tests — no data
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — no data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.2/2.5License — license file detected
3.8/7.5Maintained — 6 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — no data
0/5SAST — no SAST tool detected
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — no data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated12
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive6
scorecard_aggregate3.5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. 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.

10Critical · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

1Critical
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — 0 of 100 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—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

1Critical
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.

Code legibility for models

50Moderate
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — JavaScript without a type-check config
49.5/55Manageable file sizes — 22/221 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes1,895,997
source_files_sampled221
oversized_source_files22

Key facts

170GitHub stars
2contributors
20commits, last 12 months
6days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
0open issues
npm, Packagistpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • npm package 'tinymce' points at a different repository (https://github.com/tinymce/tinymce); excluded from ecosystem scoring
  • deps.dev does not index npm:tinymce@8.8.0; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

Star and fork history 170 ★ / 158 ⇿
170Stars
158Forks
98Releases

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.

0408012016020016915142014-052020-052026-06
Major 3Minor 30Patch 65

Each point covers 12 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.5 / 10
3.5aggregate

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 · 2026-07-21 20:25 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
n/aCI-Testsno pull request found
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
9Licenselicense file detected
5Maintained6 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTno SAST tool detected
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 0

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

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Dependency advisories not assessed

Advisory matching could not run for this report: No resolved dependencies to assess

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 tinymce/tinymce-dist. Read them side by side →

96tinymce/tinymceThe world's #1 JavaScript library for rich text editing. Available for React, Vue and AngularExceptional96Milkdown/milkdown🍼 Plugin driven WYSIWYG markdown editor framework.Exceptional96TypeCellOS/BlockNoteA React Rich Text Editor that's block-based (Notion style) and extensible. Built on top of Prosemirror and Tiptap.Exceptional100carbon-design-system/carbonA design system built by IBMExceptional99processing/p5.jsp5.js is a client-side JS platform that empowers artists, designers, students, and anyone to learn to code and express themselves creatively on the web. It is based on the core principles of Processing. Looking for p5.js 2.0? http://beta.p5js.orgExceptional99electron/electron:electron: Build cross-platform desktop apps with JavaScript, HTML, and CSSExceptional

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 v0.23.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics — npm, Packagist.