Which has better activity and maintenance signals?

Based on the repository data provided, I can compare some maintenance signals:

burntsushi/ripgrep shows stronger activity and maintenance signals:

1. Community scale: 67,262 stars and 2,728 forks indicate substantial adoption and interest.

2. Formal release process: The [RELEASE-CHECKLIST.md:L1-L58] documents a detailed, systematic release procedure involving dependency reviews, changelog updates, CI verification, and crate publishing. This suggests disciplined, regular maintenance.

3. Explicit governance policies: The repository includes an [AI_POLICY.md:L1-L39] that establishes clear contribution guidelines, indicating active community management and concern for code quality standards.

4. Documented versioning strategy: The [CHANGELOG.md:L736-L775] discusses intentional versioning changes and forward-looking release cadence ("major version will be increased a few times per year"), showing strategic planning.

5. Active changelog maintenance: The [CHANGELOG.md] documents detailed breaking changes, performance improvements, and feature enhancements across multiple versions.

killercup/cargo-edit details are more limited in the provided data, showing mostly code from the upgrade and dependency modules without equivalent governance or release documentation visible.

However, the provided repository data is a limited snapshot. For a complete assessment of current maintenance signals, you'd want to check:

• Recent commit history and frequency
• Open issues and PR response times
• Published advisories or security reports
• Current CI/CD status

FOLLOW_UPS:

• What's ripgrep's minimum Rust version support policy?
• How does cargo-edit handle workspace dependencies?
• Which repo has more open issues currently?