jakewharton/butterknife vs trinea/android-common
jakewharton/butterknife shows stronger signals overall
As of June 2026, butterknife shows healthier maintenance signals than android-common. butterknife rates Healthy overall while android-common rates Mixed. butterknife last saw a commit 2 years ago with 17+ 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.
jakewharton/butterknife →
Healthy across all four use cases
Permissive license, no critical CVEs, actively maintained — safe to depend on.
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.
- ⚠Stale — last commit 3y ago
- ⚠Concentrated ownership — top contributor handles 75% of recent commits
- ✓17 active contributors
- ✓Apache-2.0 licensed
- ✓CI configured
- ✓Tests present
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests
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
| butterknife | android-common | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 25,377 | 5,001 |
| Last commit | 2y ago | 3mo ago |
| License | Apache-2.0 | — |
| Open issues | 119 | 18 |
| Has tests | ✓ | — |
| Has CI | ✓ | — |
| Test coverage | 57% | 0% |
| Dependency CVEs | No CVEs | No CVEs |
| Architecture grade | — | — |
| Cycles | — | — |
| Bottom-line | Healthy signals | Mixed signals |
Want the full analysis? jakewharton/butterknife · trinea/android-common
Ask AI about jakewharton/butterknife vs trinea/android-common
Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.