ggml-org/llama.cpp vs tencent/hippy
ggml-org/llama.cpp shows stronger signals overall
As of September 2026, llama.cpp shows healthier maintenance signals than hippy. llama.cpp rates Healthy overall while hippy rates Mixed. llama.cpp was committed to today with 59+ active contributors, while hippy last saw a commit 4 months ago with 7+ active contributors. llama.cpp is MIT-licensed while hippy is Apache-2.0-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.
ggml-org/llama.cpp
Strong maintenance signals
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.
Scorecard "Branch-Protection" is 0/10; 1 cyclic import chain detected
- ⚠Scorecard: default branch unprotected (0/10)
- ⚠1 moderate-severity advisory on direct dependencies
- ✓Last commit today
- ✓59+ active contributors
- ✓Distributed ownership (top contributor 12% of recent commits)
- ✓MIT 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
tencent/hippy
Evidence incomplete — review before adopting
test evidence incomplete; dependency CVE scan unavailable
No blocking repository signals were found — inspect the evidence before forking.
Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.
dependency CVE scan unavailable
- ⚠Concentrated ownership — top contributor handles 65% of recent commits
- ⚠Could not verify tests from the available repository evidence
- ✓Last commit 2w ago
- ✓7 active contributors
- ✓Apache-2.0 licensed
- ✓CI configured
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests
Signal-by-signal breakdown
| llama.cpp | hippy | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 128,488 | 8,518 |
| Last commit | today | 4mo ago |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Open issues | 2,481 | 9 |
| Has tests | ✓ | Unknown |
| Has CI | ✓ | ✓ |
| Test coverage | 16% | 0% |
| Dependency CVEs | 0 critical · 0 high · 1 moderate · 0 low | No CVEs |
| Architecture grade | A | — |
| Cycles | 1 | — |
| Bottom-line | Healthy signals | Mixed signals |
Want the full analysis? ggml-org/llama.cpp · tencent/hippy
Ask AI about ggml-org/llama.cpp vs tencent/hippy
Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.