cuberto/liquid-swipe vs johncoates/aerial
johncoates/aerial shows stronger signals overall
As of June 2026, aerial shows healthier maintenance signals than liquid-swipe. aerial rates Healthy overall while liquid-swipe rates Mixed. liquid-swipe last saw a commit 5 years ago with 4+ active contributors, while aerial last saw a commit 10 months ago with 9+ 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.
cuberto/liquid-swipe →
Stale — last commit 6y ago
last commit was 6y ago; no tests detected…
no tests detected; no CI workflows detected…
no description (proxy for README missing); last commit was 6y ago
last commit was 6y ago; no CI workflows detected
- ⚠Stale — last commit 6y ago
- ⚠Small team — 4 contributors active in recent commits
- ⚠Concentrated ownership — top contributor handles 56% of recent commits
- ⚠No CI workflows detected
- ⚠No test directory detected
- ✓4 active contributors
- ✓MIT licensed
What would improve this?
- →Use as dependency Mixed → Healthy if: 1 commit in the last 365 days; add a test suite
- →Fork & modify Concerns → Mixed if: add a test suite
- →Learn from Mixed → Healthy if: add a README + repo description
- →Deploy as-is Mixed → Healthy if: 1 commit in the last 180 days
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests
johncoates/aerial →
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 9mo ago
- ⚠Concentrated ownership — top contributor handles 75% of recent commits
- ✓Last commit 9mo ago
- ✓9 active contributors
- ✓MIT licensed
- ✓CI configured
- ✓Tests present
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests
Signal-by-signal breakdown
| liquid-swipe | aerial | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 2,986 | 20,972 |
| Last commit | 5y ago | 10mo ago |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Open issues | 10 | 28 |
| Has tests | — | ✓ |
| Has CI | — | ✓ |
| Test coverage | — | — |
| Dependency CVEs | No CVEs | No CVEs |
| Architecture grade | — | — |
| Cycles | — | — |
| Bottom-line | Mixed signals | Healthy signals |
Want the full analysis? cuberto/liquid-swipe · johncoates/aerial
Ask AI about cuberto/liquid-swipe vs johncoates/aerial
Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.