barry-ran/qtscrcpy vs nixos/nix
Both showing Healthy signals — pick on fit, not health
As of June 2026, qtscrcpy and nix both show healthy maintenance signals. qtscrcpy last saw a commit 2 months ago with 15+ active contributors, while nix last saw a commit 1 month ago with 11+ active contributors. qtscrcpy is Apache-2.0-licensed while nix is LGPL-2.1-licensed. 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.
barry-ran/qtscrcpy →
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 5w ago
- ✓15 active contributors
- ✓Distributed ownership (top contributor 47% of recent commits)
- ✓Apache-2.0 licensed
- ✓CI configured
- ✓Tests present
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests
nixos/nix →
Healthy across the board
copyleft license (LGPL-2.1) — review compatibility
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.
- ⚠LGPL-2.1 is copyleft — check downstream compatibility
- ✓Last commit 1d ago
- ✓11 active contributors
- ✓Distributed ownership (top contributor 39% of recent commits)
- ✓LGPL-2.1 licensed
- ✓CI configured
- ✓Tests present
What would improve this?
- →Use as dependency Concerns → Mixed if: relicense under MIT/Apache-2.0 (rare for established libs)
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests
Signal-by-signal breakdown
| qtscrcpy | nix | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 29,419 | 16,817 |
| Last commit | 2mo ago | 1mo ago |
| License | Apache-2.0 | LGPL-2.1 |
| Open issues | 602 | 4,040 |
| Has tests | ✓ | ✓ |
| Has CI | ✓ | ✓ |
| Test coverage | 5% | 80% |
| Dependency CVEs | No CVEs | No CVEs |
| Architecture grade | — | — |
| Cycles | — | — |
| Bottom-line | Healthy signals | Healthy signals |
Want the full analysis? barry-ran/qtscrcpy · nixos/nix
Ask AI about barry-ran/qtscrcpy vs nixos/nix
Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.