google/exoplayer vs konloch/bytecode-viewer
Both showing Mixed signals — pick on fit, not health
As of June 2026, exoplayer and bytecode-viewer both show mixed maintenance signals. exoplayer last saw a commit 6 months ago with 14+ active contributors, while bytecode-viewer last saw a commit 2 months ago with 9+ active contributors. exoplayer is Apache-2.0-licensed while bytecode-viewer is GPL-3.0-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.
google/exoplayer →
Slowing — last commit 5mo ago
no tests detected; no CI workflows detected
Has a license, tests, and CI — clean foundation to fork and modify.
Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.
Scorecard "Branch-Protection" is 0/10; no CI workflows detected
- ⚠Slowing — last commit 5mo ago
- ⚠No CI workflows detected
- ⚠No test directory detected
- ⚠Scorecard: default branch unprotected (0/10)
- ✓Last commit 5mo ago
- ✓14 active contributors
- ✓Distributed ownership (top contributor 27% of recent commits)
- ✓Apache-2.0 licensed
What would improve this?
- →Use as dependency Mixed → Healthy if: add a test suite
- →Deploy as-is Mixed → 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 OpenSSF Scorecard
konloch/bytecode-viewer →
Mixed signals — read the receipts
copyleft license (GPL-3.0) — review compatibility
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 50% of recent commits
- ⚠GPL-3.0 is copyleft — check downstream compatibility
- ✓Last commit 5w ago
- ✓9 active contributors
- ✓GPL-3.0 licensed
- ✓CI configured
- ✓Tests present
What would improve this?
- →Use as dependency Concerns → Mixed if: relicense under MIT/Apache-2.0 (rare for established libs)
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests
Signal-by-signal breakdown
| exoplayer | bytecode-viewer | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 21,921 | 15,506 |
| Last commit | 6mo ago | 2mo ago |
| License | Apache-2.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Open issues | 631 | 99 |
| Has tests | — | ✓ |
| Has CI | — | ✓ |
| Test coverage | 0% | 2% |
| Dependency CVEs | No CVEs | No CVEs |
| Architecture grade | — | — |
| Cycles | — | — |
| Bottom-line | Mixed signals | Mixed signals |
Want the full analysis? google/exoplayer · konloch/bytecode-viewer
Ask AI about google/exoplayer vs konloch/bytecode-viewer
Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.