RepoPilot

chroma-core/chroma vs ultraworkers/claw-code

Both showing Healthy signals — pick on fit, not health

As of September 2026, chroma and claw-code both show healthy maintenance signals. chroma was committed to 1 week ago with 9+ active contributors, while claw-code last saw a commit 1 month ago with 11+ active contributors. chroma is Apache-2.0-licensed while claw-code 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.

chroma-core/chroma

Healthy

Strong maintenance signals

HealthyDependency

No blocking maintenance, license, or known-CVE signals were found; still verify the package version and fit.

HealthyFork & modify

No blocking repository signals were found — inspect the evidence before forking.

HealthyLearn from

Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.

MixedDeploy as-is

Scorecard "Token-Permissions" is 0/10; 8 cyclic import chains — pervasive coupling

  • Last commit today
  • 9 active contributors
  • Distributed ownership (top contributor 41% of recent commits)
  • Apache-2.0 licensed
  • CI configured
  • Tests present

What would improve this?

  • Deploy as-is Mixed to Healthy if: bring "Token-Permissions" 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

ultraworkers/claw-code

Healthy

Healthy across all four use cases

HealthyDependency

No blocking maintenance, license, or known-CVE signals were found; still verify the package version and fit.

HealthyFork & modify

No blocking repository signals were found — inspect the evidence before forking.

HealthyLearn from

Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.

HealthyDeploy as-is

No blocking repository-level signals were found; deployment review is still required.

  • Concentrated ownership — top contributor handles 65% of recent commits
  • Scorecard: default branch unprotected (0/10)
  • Last commit 3w ago
  • 11 active contributors
  • MIT licensed
  • CI configured
  • Tests present

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

chromaclaw-code
Stars29,219195,190
Last commit13d ago1mo ago
LicenseApache-2.0MIT
Open issues82341
Has tests
Has CI
Test coverage33%13%
Dependency CVEsNo CVEs0 critical · 0 high · 1 moderate · 0 low
Architecture gradeCA
Cycles80
Bottom-lineHealthy signalsHealthy signals

Want the full analysis? chroma-core/chroma · ultraworkers/claw-code

Ask AI about chroma-core/chroma vs ultraworkers/claw-code

Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.