affaan-m/ecc vs phaserjs/phaser
Both showing Healthy signals — pick on fit, not health
As of June 2026, ecc and phaser both show healthy maintenance signals. ecc was committed to 1 day ago with 33+ active contributors, while phaser was committed to 3 days ago with 7+ active contributors. Both use the MIT license. Neither has known critical or high-severity CVEs in its dependency tree.
Informational only. RepoPilot summarises public signals at the time of analysis. Not professional, security, or legal advice.
affaan-m/ecc →
Healthy across the board
Permissive license, no critical CVEs, actively maintained — safe to depend on.
Has a license, tests, and CI — clean foundation to fork and modify.
Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.
No critical CVEs, sane security posture — runnable as-is.
- ✓Last commit 2d ago
- ✓33+ active contributors
- ✓Distributed ownership (top contributor 38% of recent commits)
- ✓MIT licensed
- ✓CI configured
- ✓Tests present
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests, cross-checked against dependency CVEs from deps.dev and OpenSSF Scorecard
phaserjs/phaser →
Healthy across the board
Permissive license, no critical CVEs, actively maintained — safe to depend on.
Has a license, tests, and CI — clean foundation to fork and modify.
Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.
No critical CVEs, sane security posture — runnable as-is.
- ⚠Concentrated ownership — top contributor handles 60% of recent commits
- ✓Last commit 3d ago
- ✓7 active contributors
- ✓MIT licensed
- ✓CI configured
- ✓Tests present
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests, cross-checked against dependency CVEs from deps.dev and OpenSSF Scorecard
Signal-by-signal breakdown
| ecc | phaser | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 222,494 | 39,846 |
| Last commit | 1d ago | 3d ago |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Open issues | 94 | 114 |
| Has tests | ✓ | ✓ |
| Has CI | ✓ | ✓ |
| Test coverage | 9% | 5% |
| Dependency CVEs | No CVEs | No CVEs |
| Architecture grade | — | A |
| Cycles | — | 0 |
| Bottom-line | Healthy signals | Healthy signals |
Want the full analysis? affaan-m/ecc · phaserjs/phaser
Ask AI about affaan-m/ecc vs phaserjs/phaser
Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.