baseflow/photoview vs wasabeef/android-gpuimage
baseflow/photoview shows stronger signals overall
As of June 2026, photoview shows stronger maintenance signals than android-gpuimage. photoview rates Mixed overall while android-gpuimage rates Concerns. photoview last saw a commit 4 years ago with 20+ active contributors, while android-gpuimage last saw a commit 3 years ago with 14+ active contributors. 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.
baseflow/photoview →
Stale — last commit 4y ago
last commit was 4y ago; no tests detected…
no tests detected; no CI workflows detected…
Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.
last commit was 4y ago; no CI workflows detected
- ⚠Stale — last commit 4y ago
- ⚠Concentrated ownership — top contributor handles 60% of recent commits
- ⚠No CI workflows detected
- ⚠No test directory detected
- ✓20 active contributors
- ✓Apache-2.0 licensed
What would improve this?
- →Use as dependency Mixed → Healthy if: 1 commit in the last 365 days; add a test suite
- →Fork & modify Mixed → Healthy if: add a test suite
- →Deploy as-is Mixed → Healthy if: 1 commit in the last 180 days
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests
wasabeef/android-gpuimage →
Stale and unlicensed — last commit 4y ago
no license — legally unclear; last commit was 4y ago…
no license — can't legally use code; no tests detected…
Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.
no license — can't legally use code; last commit was 4y ago…
- ⚠Stale — last commit 4y ago
- ⚠Concentrated ownership — top contributor handles 55% of recent commits
- ⚠No license — legally unclear to depend on
- ⚠No CI workflows detected
- ⚠No test directory detected
- ✓14 active contributors
What would improve this?
- →Use as dependency Concerns → Mixed if: publish a permissive license (MIT, Apache-2.0, etc.)
- →Fork & modify Concerns → Mixed if: add a LICENSE file
- →Deploy as-is Concerns → Mixed if: add a LICENSE file
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests
Signal-by-signal breakdown
| photoview | android-gpuimage | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 18,837 | 9,156 |
| Last commit | 4y ago | 3y ago |
| License | Apache-2.0 | — |
| Open issues | 229 | 347 |
| Has tests | — | — |
| Has CI | — | — |
| Test coverage | 0% | 0% |
| Dependency CVEs | No CVEs | No CVEs |
| Architecture grade | — | — |
| Cycles | — | — |
| Bottom-line | Mixed signals | Concerns signals |
Want the full analysis? baseflow/photoview · wasabeef/android-gpuimage
Ask AI about baseflow/photoview vs wasabeef/android-gpuimage
Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.