basecamp/kamal vs ruby/rubygems
basecamp/kamal shows stronger signals overall
As of June 2026, kamal shows healthier maintenance signals than rubygems. kamal rates Healthy overall while rubygems rates Mixed. kamal last saw a commit 1 month ago with 14+ active contributors, while rubygems last saw a commit 1 month ago with 18+ active contributors. kamal is MIT-licensed while rubygems is Other-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.
basecamp/kamal →
Healthy across all four use cases
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.
- ⚠Single-maintainer risk — top contributor 80% of recent commits
- ✓Last commit 2w ago
- ✓14 active contributors
- ✓MIT licensed
- ✓CI configured
- ✓Tests present
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests
ruby/rubygems →
Mixed signals — read the receipts
non-standard license (Other)
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 66% of recent commits
- ⚠Non-standard license (Other) — review terms
- ✓Last commit 2d ago
- ✓18 active contributors
- ✓Other licensed
- ✓CI configured
- ✓Tests present
What would improve this?
- →Use as dependency Concerns → Mixed if: clarify license terms
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests
Signal-by-signal breakdown
| kamal | rubygems | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 14,194 | 3,927 |
| Last commit | 1mo ago | 1mo ago |
| License | MIT | Other |
| Open issues | 143 | 203 |
| Has tests | ✓ | ✓ |
| Has CI | ✓ | ✓ |
| Test coverage | 100% | 4% |
| Dependency CVEs | No CVEs | No CVEs |
| Architecture grade | — | — |
| Cycles | — | — |
| Bottom-line | Healthy signals | Mixed signals |
Want the full analysis? basecamp/kamal · ruby/rubygems
Ask AI about basecamp/kamal vs ruby/rubygems
Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.