RepoPilot

getzep/graphiti vs microsoft/autogen

getzep/graphiti shows stronger signals overall

As of July 2026, graphiti shows healthier maintenance signals than autogen. graphiti rates Healthy overall while autogen rates Mixed. graphiti was committed to 1 day ago with 24+ active contributors, while autogen last saw a commit 3 months ago with 33+ active contributors. graphiti is Apache-2.0-licensed while autogen is CC-BY-4.0-licensed. 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.

getzep/graphiti

Healthy

Strong maintenance signals

HealthyDependency

Permissive license, no critical CVEs, actively maintained — safe to depend on.

HealthyFork & modify

Has a license, tests, and CI — clean foundation to fork and modify.

HealthyLearn from

Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.

MixedDeploy as-is

Scorecard "Branch-Protection" is 0/10; 8 cyclic import chains — pervasive coupling

  • Scorecard: default branch unprotected (0/10)
  • Last commit 1d ago
  • 24+ active contributors
  • Distributed ownership (top contributor 35% of recent commits)
  • Apache-2.0 licensed
  • CI configured
  • Tests present

What would improve this?

  • Deploy as-is Mixed to Healthy if: bring "Branch-Protection" to ≥3/10 (see scorecard report)

Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests, cross-checked against dependency CVEs from deps.dev and OpenSSF Scorecard

microsoft/autogen

Mixed

Slowing — last commit 4mo ago

ConcernsDependency

non-standard license (CC-BY-4.0); no tests detected…

HealthyFork & modify

Has a license, tests, and CI — clean foundation to fork and modify.

HealthyLearn from

Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.

MixedDeploy as-is

Scorecard "Token-Permissions" is 0/10; no CI workflows detected

  • Slowing — last commit 4mo ago
  • Non-standard license (CC-BY-4.0) — review terms
  • No CI workflows detected
  • No test directory detected
  • Scorecard: marked unmaintained (0/10)
  • Last commit 4mo ago
  • 33+ active contributors
  • Distributed ownership (top contributor 41% of recent commits)
  • CC-BY-4.0 licensed

What would improve this?

  • Use as dependency Concerns to Mixed if: clarify license terms
  • Deploy as-is Mixed to Healthy if: bring "Token-Permissions" to ≥3/10 (see scorecard report)

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

graphitiautogen
Stars29,32260,070
Last commit1d ago3mo ago
LicenseApache-2.0CC-BY-4.0
Open issues432977
Has tests
Has CI
Test coverage43%0%
Dependency CVEsNo CVEsNo CVEs
Architecture gradeC
Cycles8
Bottom-lineHealthy signalsMixed signals

Want the full analysis? getzep/graphiti · microsoft/autogen

Ask AI about getzep/graphiti vs microsoft/autogen

Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.