jquense/yup vs mantinedev/mantine
Both showing Mixed signals — pick on fit, not health
As of September 2026, yup and mantine both show mixed maintenance signals. yup last saw a commit 1 month ago with 27+ active contributors, while mantine was committed to 2 weeks ago with 13+ active contributors. Both use the MIT license. 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.
jquense/yup
OpenSSF Scorecard says this is unmaintained
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; Scorecard "Token-Permissions" is 0/10
- ⚠Concentrated ownership — top contributor handles 50% of recent commits
- ⚠Scorecard: marked unmaintained (0/10)
- ⚠Scorecard: default branch unprotected (0/10)
- ✓Last commit 1w ago
- ✓27+ active contributors
- ✓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
mantinedev/mantine
Single-maintainer risk — review before adopting
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; 3 cyclic import chains — pervasive coupling
- ⚠Single-maintainer risk — top contributor 86% of recent commits
- ⚠Scorecard: default branch unprotected (0/10)
- ✓Last commit 1w ago
- ✓13 active contributors
- ✓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
Signal-by-signal breakdown
| yup | mantine | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 23,674 | 31,685 |
| Last commit | 1mo ago | 15d ago |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Open issues | 251 | 64 |
| Has tests | ✓ | ✓ |
| Has CI | ✓ | ✓ |
| Test coverage | 51% | 14% |
| Dependency CVEs | No CVEs | No CVEs |
| Architecture grade | — | B |
| Cycles | — | 3 |
| Bottom-line | Mixed signals | Mixed signals |
Want the full analysis? jquense/yup · mantinedev/mantine
Ask AI about jquense/yup vs mantinedev/mantine
Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.