rrzu/topsdk

This release is usable but presents meaningful maintenance and transparency concerns. It has a current stable version, five releases in the last 12 months, an unarchived repository, matching package/source identity, a license file, and no install-time lifecycle scripts. However, the repository shows no commits or active maintainers in the last 3 months, has no tests or changelog, provides only a 16-character README, has no security policy or scanning tooling, and has negligible repository adoption. The package appears to be a large generated SDK, which makes the absence of tests and minimal documentation less surprising, but the weak maintenance evidence means it should be adopted with monitoring and a fallback plan.

Latest 1.1.8

Packagist

68%

Total Score

Maintainer Stability

Maturity

Supply Chain

Health Score Breakdown

Package scaffolding

The package has a README and the repository uses GitHub Releases, but the README is only 16 characters and neither the artifact nor repository has tests or a changelog. The generated-SDK-like file tree partly explains the limited documentation, but does not compensate for the lack of validation evidence.

Project backing

The repository is owned by the individual user rrzu rather than an organization, so there is no organizational backing signal to offset the thin apparent maintenance base.

Repo commit activity

The repository recorded zero commits and zero active maintainers during the last 3 months, which is the clearest maintenance concern. Recent package releases partially offset this, but the source repository itself shows no sustained development activity in the measured period.

Repo issue activity

There are no open issues or pull requests and no issue or pull-request activity in the last month. This is not inherently unhealthy for a small generated SDK, but it provides no evidence of an engaged maintenance community.

Repo popularity

The repository has zero stars and forks and only one watcher. Popularity is supporting evidence rather than a verdict, but these counts provide little external adoption or resilience evidence.