Which has better activity and maintenance signals?

Based on the RepoPilot signals provided in the repository data:

cockroachdb/cockroach shows clear activity and maintenance signals:

• 32,435 stars, 4,101 forks — indicating substantial community adoption and ongoing engagement
• The repository data includes multiple recent code excerpts from active subsystems (backup/restore, job management, acceptance testing), suggesting continuous development
• A dedicated README section on [pkg/backup/README.md:L123-L139] for debugging and maintenance points, plus detailed code in backup_job.go showing sophisticated checkpoint and telemetry systems, indicates active iteration on core features

xiaomi/soar signals are less visible in the provided data:

• Only the README excerpt is included; no source code excerpts, commit history, or activity signals are shown
• The README references documentation and a changelog (CHANGES.md), but no timestamps or recent activity indicators are provided

OpenSSF Scorecard context (available only for cockroachdb/cockroach): 5.1/10 is moderate—it shows there are some security and practice gaps (CII-Best-Practices 0/10, Security-Policy 0/10, Dangerous-Workflow 0/10), but the project is actively maintained.

Conclusion: cockroachdb/cockroach demonstrates clearer activity and maintenance signals through community metrics, visible recent code changes, and active subsystem development. xiaomi/soar's maintenance status cannot be reliably assessed from the available data excerpt.

FOLLOW_UPS:

• What specific maintenance concerns does cockroachdb/cockroach have?
• How mature is xiaomi/soar's codebase compared to cockroachdb?
• Are there recent commits in either repository?