nrc/r4cppp vs ultraworkers/claw-code
ultraworkers/claw-code shows stronger signals overall
As of June 2026, claw-code shows healthier maintenance signals than r4cppp. claw-code rates Healthy overall while r4cppp rates Mixed. r4cppp last saw a commit 2 years ago with 34+ active contributors, while claw-code was committed to 1 day ago with 10+ active contributors. r4cppp is Other-licensed while claw-code 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.
nrc/r4cppp →
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; no CI workflows detected
- ⚠Stale — last commit 2y ago
- ⚠Non-standard license (Other) — review terms
- ⚠No CI workflows detected
- ⚠No test directory detected
- ✓34+ active contributors
- ✓Distributed ownership (top contributor 43% 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
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests
ultraworkers/claw-code →
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.
- ⚠Concentrated ownership — top contributor handles 71% of recent commits
- ✓Last commit 1d ago
- ✓10 active contributors
- ✓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
| r4cppp | claw-code | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 3,834 | 194,369 |
| Last commit | 2y ago | 1d ago |
| License | Other | MIT |
| Open issues | 60 | 20 |
| Has tests | — | ✓ |
| Has CI | — | ✓ |
| Test coverage | 0% | 17% |
| Dependency CVEs | No CVEs | 0 critical · 0 high · 1 moderate · 0 low |
| Architecture grade | — | — |
| Cycles | — | — |
| Bottom-line | Mixed signals | Healthy signals |
Want the full analysis? nrc/r4cppp · ultraworkers/claw-code
Ask AI about nrc/r4cppp vs ultraworkers/claw-code
Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.