mularahul/keyviz vs ruvnet/ruflo
Both showing Mixed signals — pick on fit, not health
As of June 2026, keyviz and ruflo both show mixed maintenance signals. keyviz last saw a commit 2 months ago with 2+ active contributors, while ruflo was committed to 2 days ago with 1+ active contributor. keyviz is GPL-3.0-licensed while ruflo 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.
mularahul/keyviz →
Single-maintainer risk — review before adopting
copyleft license (GPL-3.0) — review compatibility; top contributor handles 97% of recent commits…
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.
- ⚠Small team — 2 contributors active in recent commits
- ⚠Single-maintainer risk — top contributor 97% of recent commits
- ⚠GPL-3.0 is copyleft — check downstream compatibility
- ⚠No test directory detected
- ⚠Scorecard: default branch unprotected (0/10)
- ✓Last commit 6w ago
- ✓2 active contributors
- ✓GPL-3.0 licensed
- ✓CI configured
What would improve this?
- →Use as dependency Concerns → Mixed if: relicense under MIT/Apache-2.0 (rare for established libs)
Maintenance signals: commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests + OpenSSF Scorecard
ruvnet/ruflo →
Solo project — review before adopting
single-maintainer (no co-maintainers visible); 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
- ⚠Solo or near-solo (1 contributor active in recent commits)
- ⚠No CI workflows detected
- ⚠Scorecard: default branch unprotected (0/10)
- ✓Last commit today
- ✓MIT licensed
- ✓Tests present
What would improve this?
- →Use as dependency Mixed → Healthy if: onboard a second core maintainer
- →Deploy as-is Mixed → Healthy if: bring "Branch-Protection" to ≥3/10 (see scorecard report)
Maintenance signals: commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests + OpenSSF Scorecard
Signal-by-signal breakdown
| keyviz | ruflo | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 9,248 | 60,015 |
| Last commit | 2mo ago | 2d ago |
| License | GPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Open issues | 52 | 644 |
| Has tests | — | ✓ |
| Has CI | ✓ | — |
| Test coverage | 0% | — |
| Dependency CVEs | No CVEs | No CVEs |
| Architecture grade | — | C |
| Cycles | — | 0 |
| Bottom-line | Mixed signals | Mixed signals |
Want the full analysis? mularahul/keyviz · ruvnet/ruflo
Ask AI about mularahul/keyviz vs ruvnet/ruflo
Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.