tumobi/nideshop-mini-program vs vercel/pkg
vercel/pkg shows stronger signals overall
As of June 2026, pkg shows healthier maintenance signals than nideshop-mini-program. pkg rates Healthy overall while nideshop-mini-program rates Mixed. nideshop-mini-program last saw a commit 1 year ago with 1+ active contributor, while pkg last saw a commit 2 years ago with 26+ active contributors. 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.
tumobi/nideshop-mini-program →
Slowing — last commit 12mo ago
no license — legally unclear; single-maintainer (no co-maintainers visible)…
no license — can't legally use code; no tests detected…
Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.
no license — can't legally use code; last commit was 12mo ago…
- ⚠Slowing — last commit 12mo ago
- ⚠Solo or near-solo (1 contributor active in recent commits)
- ⚠No license — legally unclear to depend on
- ⚠No CI workflows detected
- ⚠No test directory detected
- ⚠Scorecard: default branch unprotected (0/10)
- ✓Last commit 12mo ago
What would improve this?
- →Use as dependency Concerns → Mixed if: publish a permissive license (MIT, Apache-2.0, etc.)
- →Fork & modify Concerns → Mixed if: add a LICENSE file
- →Deploy as-is Concerns → Mixed if: add a LICENSE file
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests, cross-checked against OpenSSF Scorecard
vercel/pkg →
Healthy across all four use cases
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.
- ⚠Stale — last commit 2y ago
- ✓26+ active contributors
- ✓Distributed ownership (top contributor 31% of recent commits)
- ✓MIT licensed
- ✓CI configured
- ✓Tests present
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests
Signal-by-signal breakdown
| nideshop-mini-program | pkg | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 8,344 | 24,379 |
| Last commit | 1y ago | 2y ago |
| License | — | MIT |
| Open issues | 3 | 0 |
| Has tests | — | ✓ |
| Has CI | — | ✓ |
| Test coverage | 0% | 100% |
| Dependency CVEs | No CVEs | No CVEs |
| Architecture grade | — | — |
| Cycles | — | — |
| Bottom-line | Mixed signals | Healthy signals |
Want the full analysis? tumobi/nideshop-mini-program · vercel/pkg
Ask AI about tumobi/nideshop-mini-program vs vercel/pkg
Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.