bisq-network/bisq vs yuliskov/smarttube
Both showing Mixed signals — pick on fit, not health
As of June 2026, bisq and smarttube both show mixed maintenance signals. bisq last saw a commit 1 month ago with 3+ active contributors, while smarttube last saw a commit 1 month ago with 4+ active contributors. bisq is AGPL-3.0-licensed while smarttube is MIT-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.
bisq-network/bisq →
Single-maintainer risk — review before adopting
copyleft license (AGPL-3.0) — review compatibility; top contributor handles 93% of recent commits
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.
- ⚠Small team — 3 contributors active in recent commits
- ⚠Single-maintainer risk — top contributor 93% of recent commits
- ⚠AGPL-3.0 is copyleft — check downstream compatibility
- ✓Last commit today
- ✓3 active contributors
- ✓AGPL-3.0 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
yuliskov/smarttube →
Single-maintainer risk — review before adopting
top contributor handles 97% of recent commits; no tests detected
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.
- ⚠Small team — 4 contributors active in recent commits
- ⚠Single-maintainer risk — top contributor 97% of recent commits
- ⚠No test directory detected
- ⚠Scorecard: default branch unprotected (0/10)
- ✓Last commit 2d ago
- ✓4 active contributors
- ✓MIT licensed
- ✓CI configured
What would improve this?
- →Use as dependency Mixed → Healthy if: diversify commit ownership (top <90%)
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests, cross-checked against OpenSSF Scorecard
Signal-by-signal breakdown
| bisq | smarttube | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 5,097 | 30,059 |
| Last commit | 1mo ago | 1mo ago |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Open issues | 173 | 713 |
| Has tests | ✓ | — |
| Has CI | ✓ | ✓ |
| Test coverage | 97% | 0% |
| Dependency CVEs | No CVEs | No CVEs |
| Architecture grade | — | — |
| Cycles | — | — |
| Bottom-line | Mixed signals | Mixed signals |
Want the full analysis? bisq-network/bisq · yuliskov/smarttube
Ask AI about bisq-network/bisq vs yuliskov/smarttube
Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.