farzaa/clicky vs swiftyjson/swiftyjson
swiftyjson/swiftyjson shows stronger signals overall
As of June 2026, swiftyjson shows healthier maintenance signals than clicky. swiftyjson rates Healthy overall while clicky rates Mixed. clicky last saw a commit 2 months ago with 1+ active contributor, while swiftyjson last saw a commit 3 months ago with 28+ 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.
farzaa/clicky →
Solo project — review before adopting
single-maintainer (no co-maintainers visible); no tests detected…
no tests detected; no CI workflows detected…
Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.
No critical CVEs, sane security posture — runnable as-is.
- ⚠Solo or near-solo (1 contributor active in recent commits)
- ⚠No CI workflows detected
- ⚠No test directory detected
- ✓Last commit 2w ago
- ✓MIT licensed
What would improve this?
- →Use as dependency Mixed → Healthy if: onboard a second core maintainer; add a test suite
- →Fork & modify Mixed → Healthy if: add a test suite
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests
swiftyjson/swiftyjson →
Healthy across the board
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.
- ⚠Concentrated ownership — top contributor handles 63% of recent commits
- ✓Last commit 2mo ago
- ✓28+ 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
| clicky | swiftyjson | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 5,647 | 22,953 |
| Last commit | 2mo ago | 3mo ago |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Open issues | 60 | 136 |
| Has tests | — | ✓ |
| Has CI | — | ✓ |
| Test coverage | 0% | — |
| Dependency CVEs | No CVEs | No CVEs |
| Architecture grade | — | — |
| Cycles | — | — |
| Bottom-line | Mixed signals | Healthy signals |
Want the full analysis? farzaa/clicky · swiftyjson/swiftyjson
Ask AI about farzaa/clicky vs swiftyjson/swiftyjson
Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.