foundation/foundation-sites vs twbs/bootstrap
twbs/bootstrap shows stronger signals overall
As of September 2026, bootstrap shows healthier maintenance signals than foundation-sites. bootstrap rates Healthy overall while foundation-sites rates Mixed. foundation-sites last saw a commit 1 year ago with 12+ active contributors, while bootstrap was committed to 2 weeks ago with 10+ 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.
foundation/foundation-sites
Stale — last commit 2y ago
No blocking maintenance, license, or known-CVE signals were found; still verify the package version and fit.
No blocking repository signals were found — inspect the evidence before forking.
Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.
last commit was 2y ago; Scorecard "Token-Permissions" is 0/10
- ⚠Stale — last commit 2y ago
- ⚠Single-maintainer risk — top contributor 86% of recent commits
- ⚠Scorecard: marked unmaintained (0/10)
- ⚠2 moderate-severity advisories on direct dependencies
- ✓12 active contributors
- ✓MIT licensed
- ✓CI configured
- ✓Tests present
What would improve this?
- •Deploy as-is Mixed to Healthy if: 1 commit in the last 180 days
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests, cross-checked against dependency CVEs from deps.dev and OpenSSF Scorecard
twbs/bootstrap
Healthy across all four use cases
No blocking maintenance, license, or known-CVE signals were found; still verify the package version and fit.
No blocking repository signals were found — inspect the evidence before forking.
Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.
No blocking repository-level signals were found; deployment review is still required.
- ⚠Scorecard: known vulnerabilities detected (scored 0/10 by OpenSSF)
- ⚠Concentrated ownership — top contributor handles 54% of recent commits
- ✓Last commit 1d ago
- ✓10 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
| foundation-sites | bootstrap | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 29,784 | 174,677 |
| Last commit | 1y ago | 18d ago |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Open issues | 80 | 227 |
| Has tests | ✓ | ✓ |
| Has CI | ✓ | ✓ |
| Test coverage | 100% | 53% |
| Dependency CVEs | 0 critical · 0 high · 2 moderate · 0 low | No CVEs |
| Architecture grade | — | — |
| Cycles | — | — |
| Bottom-line | Mixed signals | Healthy signals |
Want the full analysis? foundation/foundation-sites · twbs/bootstrap
Ask AI about foundation/foundation-sites vs twbs/bootstrap
Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.