Which has better activity and maintenance signals?

Based on the RepoPilot analysis provided, I can only make a direct comparison for affaan-m/ecc:

affaan-m/ecc:

• Verdict: GO — Healthy across the board
• Dependency security: 0 critical, 0 high, 0 moderate CVEs (deps.dev)
• OpenSSF Scorecard: 6.9/10
• Community signals: 233,141 stars, 35,533 forks, active npm packages (ecc-universal, ecc-agentshield)
• GitHub App actively distributed via marketplace

juliusbrussee/caveman:

• No RepoPilot analysis signals were provided in the repository data block.

From what's visible in the caveman source, there are committed benchmarks, evaluation infrastructure (evals/, benchmarks/ with documented token count measurements), and active skill plugins, suggesting ongoing maintenance. However, without RepoPilot's authoritative signals for caveman (import graph, CVE scans, scorecard, dependency health), I cannot make a definitive comparison.

To fairly assess which has better maintenance, I'd need:

• caveman's dependency security scan results
• caveman's OpenSSF Scorecard rating
• caveman's contributor and release activity metrics

The ecc repo shows strong health signals across security and community metrics, but caveman's lack of provided analysis data prevents a complete side-by-side verdict.

FOLLOW_UPS:

• What is caveman's OpenSSF Scorecard rating?
• How many stars and forks does caveman have?
• When was caveman's last release or commit?