RepoPilot

bottlepy/bottle vs ebookfoundation/free-programming-books

Both showing Mixed signals — pick on fit, not health

As of June 2026, bottle and free-programming-books both show mixed maintenance signals. bottle last saw a commit 3 months ago with 18+ active contributors, while free-programming-books was committed to 3 days ago with 80+ active contributors. bottle is MIT-licensed while free-programming-books is CC-BY-4.0-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.

bottlepy/bottle

Mixed

Slowing — last commit 3mo ago

HealthyDependency

Permissive license, no critical CVEs, actively maintained — safe to depend on.

HealthyFork & modify

Has a license, tests, and CI — clean foundation to fork and modify.

HealthyLearn from

Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.

MixedDeploy as-is

Scorecard "Branch-Protection" is 0/10; Scorecard "Token-Permissions" is 0/10

  • Slowing — last commit 3mo ago
  • Concentrated ownership — top contributor handles 78% of recent commits
  • Scorecard: marked unmaintained (0/10)
  • Scorecard: default branch unprotected (0/10)
  • Last commit 3mo ago
  • 18 active contributors
  • MIT licensed
  • CI configured
  • Tests present

What would improve this?

  • Deploy as-is MixedHealthy if: bring "Branch-Protection" to ≥3/10 (see scorecard report)

Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests, cross-checked against OpenSSF Scorecard

ebookfoundation/free-programming-books

Mixed

Mixed signals — read the receipts

ConcernsDependency

non-standard license (CC-BY-4.0); no tests detected

HealthyFork & modify

Has a license, tests, and CI — clean foundation to fork and modify.

HealthyLearn from

Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.

HealthyDeploy as-is

No critical CVEs, sane security posture — runnable as-is.

  • Non-standard license (CC-BY-4.0) — review terms
  • No test directory detected
  • Last commit today
  • 80+ active contributors
  • Distributed ownership (top contributor 5% of recent commits)
  • CC-BY-4.0 licensed
  • CI configured

What would improve this?

  • Use as dependency ConcernsMixed if: clarify license terms

Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests, cross-checked against OpenSSF Scorecard

Signal-by-signal breakdown

bottlefree-programming-books
Stars8,771390,762
Last commit3mo ago3d ago
LicenseMITCC-BY-4.0
Open issues28478
Has tests
Has CI
Test coverage100%0%
Dependency CVEsNo CVEsNo CVEs
Architecture grade
Cycles
Bottom-lineMixed signalsMixed signals

Want the full analysis? bottlepy/bottle · ebookfoundation/free-programming-books

Ask AI about bottlepy/bottle vs ebookfoundation/free-programming-books

Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.