jstedfast/mailkit vs shadowsocks/shadowsocks-windows
Both showing Mixed signals — pick on fit, not health
As of September 2026, mailkit and shadowsocks-windows both show mixed maintenance signals. mailkit was committed to 4 weeks ago with 4+ active contributors, while shadowsocks-windows last saw a commit 1 year ago with 11+ active contributors. mailkit is MIT-licensed while shadowsocks-windows 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.
jstedfast/mailkit
Single-maintainer risk — review before adopting
no tests detected in the complete Git tree; dependency CVE scan unavailable
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; dependency CVE scan unavailable
- ⚠Small team — 4 contributors active in recent commits
- ⚠Single-maintainer risk — top contributor 85% of recent commits
- ⚠No tests detected in the complete Git tree
- ⚠Scorecard: default branch unprotected (0/10)
- ✓Last commit 2w ago
- ✓4 active contributors
- ✓MIT licensed
- ✓CI configured
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests, cross-checked against OpenSSF Scorecard
shadowsocks/shadowsocks-windows
Stale — last commit 2y ago
copyleft license (GPL-3.0) — review compatibility; last commit was 2y ago…
No blocking repository signals were found — inspect the evidence before forking.
Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.
last commit was 2y ago; Scorecard "Branch-Protection" is 1/10…
- ⚠Stale — last commit 2y ago
- ⚠GPL-3.0 is copyleft — check downstream compatibility
- ⚠Scorecard: marked unmaintained (0/10)
- ⚠Scorecard: default branch unprotected (1/10)
- ✓11 active contributors
- ✓Distributed ownership (top contributor 44% of recent commits)
- ✓GPL-3.0 licensed
- ✓CI configured
- ✓Tests present
What would improve this?
- •Use as dependency Concerns to Mixed if: relicense under MIT/Apache-2.0 (rare for established libs)
- •Deploy as-is Mixed to Healthy if: 1 commit in the last 180 days
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests, cross-checked against OpenSSF Scorecard
Signal-by-signal breakdown
| mailkit | shadowsocks-windows | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 6,851 | 59,569 |
| Last commit | 28d ago | 1y ago |
| License | MIT | GPL-3.0 |
| Open issues | 9 | 203 |
| Has tests | No | ✓ |
| Has CI | ✓ | ✓ |
| Test coverage | 0% | 9% |
| Dependency CVEs | No CVEs | No CVEs |
| Architecture grade | C | C |
| Cycles | 0 | 0 |
| Bottom-line | Mixed signals | Mixed signals |
Want the full analysis? jstedfast/mailkit · shadowsocks/shadowsocks-windows
Ask AI about jstedfast/mailkit vs shadowsocks/shadowsocks-windows
Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.