codingapi/tx-lcn vs conductor-oss/conductor
conductor-oss/conductor shows stronger signals overall
As of September 2026, conductor shows healthier maintenance signals than tx-lcn. conductor rates Healthy overall while tx-lcn rates Mixed. tx-lcn last saw a commit 3 years ago with 10+ active contributors, while conductor was committed to 1 week ago with 20+ 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.
codingapi/tx-lcn
Stale — last commit 3y ago
last commit was 3y ago; dependency CVE scan unavailable
No blocking repository signals were found — inspect the evidence before forking.
Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.
last commit was 3y ago; dependency CVE scan unavailable
- ⚠Stale — last commit 3y ago
- ✓10 active contributors
- ✓Distributed ownership (top contributor 31% of recent commits)
- ✓Apache-2.0 licensed
- ✓CI configured
- ✓Tests present
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests
conductor-oss/conductor
Strong maintenance signals
dependency CVE scan unavailable
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; dependency CVE scan unavailable
- ⚠Scorecard: default branch unprotected (0/10)
- ✓Last commit today
- ✓20 active contributors
- ✓Distributed ownership (top contributor 19% of recent commits)
- ✓Apache-2.0 licensed
- ✓CI configured
- ✓Tests present
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests, cross-checked against OpenSSF Scorecard
Signal-by-signal breakdown
| tx-lcn | conductor | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 4,177 | 32,185 |
| Last commit | 3y ago | 9d ago |
| License | Apache-2.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Open issues | 198 | 258 |
| Has tests | ✓ | ✓ |
| Has CI | ✓ | ✓ |
| Test coverage | 16% | 42% |
| Dependency CVEs | No CVEs | No CVEs |
| Architecture grade | — | C |
| Cycles | — | 0 |
| Bottom-line | Mixed signals | Healthy signals |
Want the full analysis? codingapi/tx-lcn · conductor-oss/conductor
Ask AI about codingapi/tx-lcn vs conductor-oss/conductor
Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.