matterport/mask_rcnn vs nextlevelbuilder/ui-ux-pro-max-skill
nextlevelbuilder/ui-ux-pro-max-skill shows stronger signals overall
As of June 2026, ui-ux-pro-max-skill shows healthier maintenance signals than mask_rcnn. ui-ux-pro-max-skill rates Healthy overall while mask_rcnn rates Mixed. mask_rcnn last saw a commit 2 years ago with 31+ active contributors, while ui-ux-pro-max-skill was committed to today with 31+ active contributors. mask_rcnn is Other-licensed while ui-ux-pro-max-skill is MIT-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.
matterport/mask_rcnn →
Stale — last commit 2y ago
non-standard license (Other); last commit was 2y ago…
Has a license, tests, and CI — clean foundation to fork and modify.
Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.
last commit was 2y ago; Scorecard "Branch-Protection" is 0/10…
- ⚠Stale — last commit 2y ago
- ⚠Non-standard license (Other) — review terms
- ⚠No CI workflows detected
- ⚠No test directory detected
- ⚠Scorecard: marked unmaintained (0/10)
- ⚠Scorecard: default branch unprotected (0/10)
- ✓31+ active contributors
- ✓Distributed ownership (top contributor 45% of recent commits)
- ✓Other licensed
What would improve this?
- →Use as dependency Concerns → Mixed if: clarify license terms
- →Deploy as-is Mixed → Healthy if: 1 commit in the last 180 days; 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
nextlevelbuilder/ui-ux-pro-max-skill →
Healthy across the board
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.
- ⚠Scorecard: default branch unprotected (0/10)
- ✓Last commit 1d ago
- ✓31+ active contributors
- ✓Distributed ownership (top contributor 43% of recent commits)
- ✓MIT licensed
- ✓CI configured
- ✓Tests present
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
| mask_rcnn | ui-ux-pro-max-skill | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 25,560 | 97,014 |
| Last commit | 2y ago | today |
| License | Other | MIT |
| Open issues | 2,021 | 130 |
| Has tests | — | ✓ |
| Has CI | — | ✓ |
| Test coverage | 0% | 25% |
| Dependency CVEs | No CVEs | No CVEs |
| Architecture grade | — | C |
| Cycles | — | 0 |
| Bottom-line | Mixed signals | Healthy signals |
Want the full analysis? matterport/mask_rcnn · nextlevelbuilder/ui-ux-pro-max-skill
Ask AI about matterport/mask_rcnn vs nextlevelbuilder/ui-ux-pro-max-skill
Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.