shrinerb/shrine vs splitrb/split
shrinerb/shrine shows stronger signals overall
As of September 2026, shrine shows healthier maintenance signals than split. shrine rates Healthy overall while split rates Mixed. shrine last saw a commit 2 months ago with 22+ active contributors, while split was committed to 1 week ago with 8+ active contributors. Both use the MIT license. 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.
shrinerb/shrine
Strong maintenance signals
No blocking maintenance, license, or known-CVE signals were found; still verify the package version and fit.
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; Scorecard "Token-Permissions" is 0/10
- ⚠Concentrated ownership — top contributor handles 75% of recent commits
- ⚠Scorecard: default branch unprotected (0/10)
- ✓Last commit 5w ago
- ✓22+ active contributors
- ✓MIT licensed
- ✓CI configured
- ✓Tests present
What would improve this?
- •Deploy as-is Mixed to Healthy if: 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 dependency CVEs from deps.dev and OpenSSF Scorecard
splitrb/split
Single-maintainer risk — review before adopting
No blocking maintenance, license, or known-CVE signals were found; still verify the package version and fit.
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; Scorecard "Token-Permissions" is 0/10
- ⚠Single-maintainer risk — top contributor 88% of recent commits
- ⚠Scorecard: default branch unprotected (0/10)
- ✓Last commit today
- ✓8 active contributors
- ✓MIT licensed
- ✓CI configured
- ✓Tests present
What would improve this?
- •Deploy as-is Mixed to Healthy if: 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 dependency CVEs from deps.dev and OpenSSF Scorecard
Signal-by-signal breakdown
| shrine | split | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 3,286 | 2,707 |
| Last commit | 2mo ago | 9d ago |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Open issues | 1 | 35 |
| Has tests | ✓ | ✓ |
| Has CI | ✓ | ✓ |
| Test coverage | 89% | 89% |
| Dependency CVEs | No CVEs | No CVEs |
| Architecture grade | A | C |
| Cycles | 0 | 0 |
| Bottom-line | Healthy signals | Mixed signals |
Want the full analysis? shrinerb/shrine · splitrb/split
Ask AI about shrinerb/shrine vs splitrb/split
Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.