Which has better activity and maintenance signals?

Based on the RepoPilot analysis provided:

karumi/dexter shows a "GO — Healthy across all four use cases" verdict, which indicates positive signals across reliability, dependency fit, software assurance, and architectural health.

However, the README explicitly states [README.md:L3-L4]: "This project is no longer under active development." This is a critical maintenance signal—despite healthy code quality signals, the project has entered maintenance-only mode and the maintainers recommend users look elsewhere for active alternatives.

proxyee-down-org/proxyee-down has no explicit maintenance status declaration in the provided data, so its activity level cannot be definitively determined from these excerpts.

In summary: karumi/dexter has better computed signals (RepoPilot's health verdict), but worse maintenance reality (no active development). If you need an actively maintained permissions library, the README itself directs you elsewhere. If you're evaluating proxyee-down-org/proxyee-down for adoption, you'd need to check its git commit history, issue response times, and release cadence to compare ongoing maintenance levels between the two.

FOLLOW_UPS:

• When was karumi/dexter's last commit or release?
• How does proxyee-down maintenance compare by activity metrics?
• What replacement does karumi/dexter recommend?