code4craft/webmagic vs lmax-exchange/disruptor
Both showing Healthy signals — pick on fit, not health
As of June 2026, webmagic and disruptor both show healthy maintenance signals. webmagic last saw a commit 6 months ago with 14+ active contributors, while disruptor last saw a commit 1 year ago with 14+ active contributors. Both use the Apache-2.0 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.
code4craft/webmagic →
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.
- ⚠Slowing — last commit 5mo ago
- ⚠Concentrated ownership — top contributor handles 74% of recent commits
- ✓Last commit 5mo ago
- ✓14 active contributors
- ✓Apache-2.0 licensed
- ✓CI configured
- ✓Tests present
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests
lmax-exchange/disruptor →
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 1y ago
- ⚠Concentrated ownership — top contributor handles 61% of recent commits
- ✓14 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
| webmagic | disruptor | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 11,684 | 18,326 |
| Last commit | 6mo ago | 1y ago |
| License | Apache-2.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Open issues | 367 | 17 |
| Has tests | ✓ | ✓ |
| Has CI | ✓ | ✓ |
| Test coverage | 66% | 41% |
| Dependency CVEs | No CVEs | No CVEs |
| Architecture grade | — | — |
| Cycles | — | — |
| Bottom-line | Healthy signals | Healthy signals |
Want the full analysis? code4craft/webmagic · lmax-exchange/disruptor
Ask AI about code4craft/webmagic vs lmax-exchange/disruptor
Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.