blackcandy-org/blackcandy vs suse/portus
Both showing Healthy signals — pick on fit, not health
As of June 2026, blackcandy and portus both show healthy maintenance signals. blackcandy last saw a commit 1 month ago with 2+ active contributors, while portus last saw a commit 3 years ago with 6+ active contributors. blackcandy is MIT-licensed while portus is Apache-2.0-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.
blackcandy-org/blackcandy →
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.
- ⚠Small team — 2 contributors active in recent commits
- ⚠Single-maintainer risk — top contributor 99% of recent commits
- ✓Last commit 3d ago
- ✓2 active contributors
- ✓MIT licensed
- ✓CI configured
- ✓Tests present
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests
suse/portus →
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.
- ⚠Stale — last commit 3y ago
- ⚠Concentrated ownership — top contributor handles 71% of recent commits
- ✓6 active contributors
- ✓Apache-2.0 licensed
- ✓CI configured
- ✓Tests present
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests
Signal-by-signal breakdown
| blackcandy | portus | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 4,182 | 2,986 |
| Last commit | 1mo ago | 3y ago |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Open issues | 31 | 155 |
| Has tests | ✓ | ✓ |
| Has CI | ✓ | ✓ |
| Test coverage | 63% | 1% |
| Dependency CVEs | No CVEs | No CVEs |
| Architecture grade | — | — |
| Cycles | — | — |
| Bottom-line | Healthy signals | Healthy signals |
Want the full analysis? blackcandy-org/blackcandy · suse/portus
Ask AI about blackcandy-org/blackcandy vs suse/portus
Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.