google/exoplayer vs trinea/android-common
Both showing Mixed signals — pick on fit, not health
As of June 2026, exoplayer and android-common both show mixed maintenance signals. exoplayer last saw a commit 6 months ago with 14+ active contributors, while android-common last saw a commit 3 months ago with 7+ active contributors. 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
trinea/android-common →
Missing license — unclear to depend on
no license — legally unclear; top contributor handles 94% of recent commits…
no license — can't legally use code; no tests detected…
Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.
no license — can't legally use code; no CI workflows detected
- ⚠Single-maintainer risk — top contributor 94% of recent commits
- ⚠No license — legally unclear to depend on
- ⚠No CI workflows detected
- ⚠No test directory detected
- ✓Last commit 6w ago
- ✓7 active contributors
What would improve this?
- →Use as dependency Concerns → Mixed if: publish a permissive license (MIT, Apache-2.0, etc.)
- →Fork & modify Concerns → Mixed if: add a LICENSE file
- →Deploy as-is Concerns → Mixed if: add a LICENSE file
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests
Signal-by-signal breakdown
| exoplayer | android-common | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 21,921 | 5,001 |
| Last commit | 6mo ago | 3mo ago |
| License | Apache-2.0 | — |
| Open issues | 631 | 18 |
| Has tests | — | — |
| Has CI | — | — |
| Test coverage | 0% | 0% |
| Dependency CVEs | No CVEs | No CVEs |
| Architecture grade | — | — |
| Cycles | — | — |
| Bottom-line | Mixed signals | Mixed signals |
Want the full analysis? google/exoplayer · trinea/android-common
Ask AI about google/exoplayer vs trinea/android-common
Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.