Compare two GitHub repositories already indexed by Browse Awesome. Enter each exact owner/repository or GitHub URL to view stored metadata, observation dates and awesome-list sources side by side. Use the differences to plan your upstream checks, not to select a winner from stars or infer that a project is maintained.
Choose two repository identities
Use owner/repo or https://github.com/owner/repo. Repository subpages, query strings and other hosts are not accepted. Nothing is fetched from GitHub when you submit.
Example comparison
Requests and HTTPX demonstrate the fields, not interchangeable recommendations.
Stored observations, not a live GitHub check. Dates are UTC. A missing observation is not a zero or a pass.
Start with two candidates for the same job, not the two largest projects you know. Write the requirement that would make either candidate worth testing: a supported runtime, an integration, a deployment constraint or a particular operation. The comparison makes catalog differences visible. It does not determine whether either project implements that requirement.
Read the metadata sync date before comparing the numbers. Two star counts captured on different dates are not a simultaneous measurement. GitHub describes stars as a way to save repositories and show appreciation; a larger count does not prove better software, compatibility or security. If growth matters, use the star-growth baseline guide to distinguish a stored count from a change over a measured window.
What Browse Awesome checks—and what it does not
This tool looks up two exact identities in Browse Awesome's existing public repository catalog. It reads stored GitHub metadata and recorded awesome-list memberships. Submitting the form does not call GitHub, scan source code, install dependencies or update the catalog. A valid identity that is missing from this catalog stays unobserved; the tool does not infer that the repository is missing from GitHub.
Enter exact identities, read the dated catalog observations, then verify the required behavior upstream. These are separate evidence steps.
An archive value is shown only when a metadata sync is recorded. “No” means not archived at that observation, not actively maintained. GitHub explains that archived repositories are read-only. An unarchived project still needs release, issue-response and documentation checks. The stored license label is likewise a discovery aid: read the actual files and the terms applying to your intended version. GitHub's licensing documentation explains why public visibility is not a substitute for a license.
Detected stack labels come from stored dependency-manifest observations, not a full architectural review. A dependency in a test group or example directory may not be an application's runtime requirement. Follow the catalog detail link to inspect the available evidence and detection date. Missing labels do not prove that a technology is absent.
Why awesome-list sources belong beside the numbers
List membership gives you a route back to the discovery context. Open the source list, find its category and inspect how the curator describes the project. Several mentions can help you discover more contexts; they do not establish independent endorsements. Lists can share entries, use different inclusion rules or retain older recommendations.
The comparison shows up to ten memberships in lists currently marked active and enabled in this catalog, with each list's last recorded scan date. “No membership recorded” describes this view, not all GitHub lists. Additional recorded memberships remain available on the repository detail page. Use the awesome-list directory to find neighboring categories rather than treating a mention count as a ranking.
Turn the comparison into a small trial
For each candidate, record one evidence URL, the version you checked, the unresolved requirement and your next test. Keep “not checked” separate from “does not support it.” Follow the repository shortlisting worksheet for a repeatable evaluation. If neither candidate fits, return to repository search with a more specific task instead of choosing the larger star count.
Methodology checked October 27, 2026 against Browse Awesome's comparison code and GitHub's repository metadata reference. That date describes the method, not the freshness of every catalog entry. Stored data can change on later catalog refreshes. Cite this tool as “Browse Awesome, Compare GitHub repositories,” link to this base page and record the observation dates in any comparison you publish.
