RepoPilot

quivrhq/quivr vs z4nzu/hackingtool

z4nzu/hackingtool shows stronger signals overall

As of June 2026, hackingtool shows healthier maintenance signals than quivr. hackingtool rates Healthy overall while quivr rates Mixed. quivr last saw a commit 11 months ago with 7+ active contributors, while hackingtool last saw a commit 3 months ago with 10+ active contributors. quivr is Other-licensed while hackingtool 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.

quivrhq/quivr

Mixed

Slowing — last commit 10mo ago

ConcernsDependency

non-standard license (Other)

HealthyFork & modify

Has a license, tests, and CI — clean foundation to fork and modify.

HealthyLearn from

Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.

HealthyDeploy as-is

No critical CVEs, sane security posture — runnable as-is.

  • Slowing — last commit 10mo ago
  • Non-standard license (Other) — review terms
  • Last commit 10mo ago
  • 7 active contributors
  • Distributed ownership (top contributor 42% of recent commits)
  • Other licensed
  • CI configured
  • Tests present

What would improve this?

  • Use as dependency ConcernsMixed if: clarify license terms

Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests

z4nzu/hackingtool

Healthy

Healthy across the board

HealthyDependency

Permissive license, no critical CVEs, actively maintained — safe to depend on.

HealthyFork & modify

Has a license, tests, and CI — clean foundation to fork and modify.

HealthyLearn from

Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.

HealthyDeploy as-is

No critical CVEs, sane security posture — runnable as-is.

  • Concentrated ownership — top contributor handles 57% of recent commits
  • Last commit 8w ago
  • 10 active contributors
  • MIT licensed
  • CI configured
  • Tests present

Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests

Signal-by-signal breakdown

quivrhackingtool
Stars39,14073,012
Last commit11mo ago3mo ago
LicenseOtherMIT
Open issues23100
Has tests
Has CI
Test coverage87%3%
Dependency CVEsNo CVEsNo CVEs
Architecture grade
Cycles
Bottom-lineMixed signalsHealthy signals

Want the full analysis? quivrhq/quivr · z4nzu/hackingtool

Ask AI about quivrhq/quivr vs z4nzu/hackingtool

Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.