Which has better activity and maintenance signals?

Based on the RepoPilot analysis provided, codingapi/tx-lcn shows stronger signals:

codingapi/tx-lcn:

• Verdict: GO — Healthy across all four use cases — this is RepoPilot's authoritative verdict covering reliability, dependency fit, software assurance, and whether to depend on it.
• 4,177 stars and 1,444 forks indicate substantial community adoption
• Active CI/CD infrastructure (Travis CI badge present in README)
• Code coverage tracking (codecov badge in README)
• Defined contribution process with PR reviews [README.md:L17-L23]

scwang90/smartrefreshlayout:

• No RepoPilot verdict is provided in the analysis section
• Repository data shows primarily example code and drawable implementations
• No CI/CD or coverage badges visible in the excerpt

Key difference: The RepoPilot analysis explicitly rates tx-lcn as healthy across all four use cases, which is a computed signal based on import graphs, cycles, dependency advisories, and code-quality findings. No corresponding analysis is present for smartrefreshlayout, which means either it wasn't analyzed or the signal is unknown.

For maintenance activity specifically, tx-lcn's documented contribution workflow [README.md:L17-L23] and the presence of active PR review processes suggest organized ongoing maintenance.

FOLLOW_UPS:

• What is tx-lcn's current release cycle or version strategy?
• Does smartrefreshlayout have documented contribution guidelines?
• Are there open issues or pending PRs in either repository?