browser-use/browser-use vs textualize/rich
Both showing Mixed signals — pick on fit, not health
As of September 2026, browser-use and rich both show mixed maintenance signals. browser-use was committed to 1 week ago with 9+ active contributors, while rich last saw a commit 2 months ago with 5+ active contributors. Both use the MIT license. 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.
browser-use/browser-use
Single-maintainer risk — review before adopting
No blocking maintenance, license, or known-CVE signals were found; still verify the package version and fit.
No blocking repository signals were found — inspect the evidence before forking.
Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.
Scorecard "Branch-Protection" is 0/10; 8 cyclic import chains — pervasive coupling
- ⚠Single-maintainer risk — top contributor 81% of recent commits
- ⚠Scorecard: default branch unprotected (0/10)
- ✓Last commit 1d ago
- ✓9 active contributors
- ✓MIT licensed
- ✓CI configured
- ✓Tests present
What would improve this?
- •Deploy as-is Mixed to Healthy 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 dependency CVEs from deps.dev and OpenSSF Scorecard
textualize/rich
Single-maintainer risk — review before adopting
No blocking maintenance, license, or known-CVE signals were found; still verify the package version and fit.
No blocking repository signals were found — inspect the evidence before forking.
Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.
Scorecard "Branch-Protection" is 0/10; 8 cyclic import chains — pervasive coupling
- ⚠Single-maintainer risk — top contributor 93% of recent commits
- ⚠Scorecard: default branch unprotected (0/10)
- ✓Last commit 2mo ago
- ✓5 active contributors
- ✓MIT licensed
- ✓CI configured
- ✓Tests present
What would improve this?
- •Deploy as-is Mixed to Healthy 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 dependency CVEs from deps.dev and OpenSSF Scorecard
Signal-by-signal breakdown
| browser-use | rich | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 112,783 | 57,252 |
| Last commit | 11d ago | 2mo ago |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Open issues | 393 | 372 |
| Has tests | ✓ | ✓ |
| Has CI | ✓ | ✓ |
| Test coverage | 50% | 47% |
| Dependency CVEs | No CVEs | No CVEs |
| Architecture grade | C | C |
| Cycles | 8 | 8 |
| Bottom-line | Mixed signals | Mixed signals |
Want the full analysis? browser-use/browser-use · textualize/rich
Ask AI about browser-use/browser-use vs textualize/rich
Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.