Check four things each quarter: date of the latest release, commit activity, whether maintainers answer issues, and whether the project is archived or marked deprecated. No single signal decides it. Two or more bad signs mean you should write a replacement plan, even if nothing is broken today.
Why this belongs in quarterly planning
An upgrade plan assumes a newer version exists to upgrade to. If upstream has stopped, the right action is not an upgrade, it is a decision: replace, fork, or accept the risk with a named owner. Spotting that early is cheaper than discovering it during an advisory.
The four signals
| Signal | Where to look | Worrying sign |
|---|---|---|
| Latest release | Registry page or releases tab | Long gap while open issues pile up |
| Commit activity | Repository history | No commits for a long stretch |
| Issue and pull request response | Issue tracker | Security reports sitting unanswered |
| Status | Repository banner, README | Archived, deprecated, or "looking for maintainers" |
A quiet project is not always dead. Some small, finished libraries are stable and rarely change. The difference is whether bug and security reports still get a reply.
What one public check does
The OpenSSF Scorecard project documents a Maintained check rated as high risk, because an inactive project may carry unpatched vulnerabilities. Per its documentation, an archived project receives the lowest score, and a project with at least one commit per week across the previous 90 days receives the highest. Activity on issues from collaborators, members or owners earns a partial score. That is a useful automated starting point, but not a verdict. Quiet, finished libraries can score low, and active ones can still ignore security reports.
Read the current Scorecard documentation before relying on thresholds, as checks evolve.
A short manual test
- Open the repository and note the last release and last commit.
- Read the five most recent issues. Did a maintainer respond?
- Search for security advisories. Were fixes published, and how fast?
- Check the maintainer list. Is it one person, or a group?
- Look for a successor or fork that the community has adopted.
Decide on action
- Healthy. Keep it in the normal upgrade lane.
- Quiet but stable. Note it, watch for advisories, and recheck next quarter.
- Declining. Plan a replacement over the next two quarters. Evaluate alternatives with the same checks.
- Abandoned with open advisories. Treat it as urgent. Options are patching locally, replacing, or wrapping and isolating. See abandoned package takeover risks for the added risk.
Record the decision
Add a column in your inventory for maintenance status and the date you last checked. A lightweight register avoids repeating the same research every quarter, and gives auditors and buyers a clear answer when they ask how you track unmaintained components.
Where Safeguard fits
Safeguard's SBOM and dependency scanning lists every package you use, which is the list to check, and it flags known advisories on each. A free scan is at gold.safeguard.sh/scan.
Quick check
Is a library with no recent commits automatically a risk?
No. Some are feature-complete. Check whether issues and security reports still get answers before deciding.
How often should I recheck?
Quarterly for your top dependencies, and immediately when a new advisory appears for one.
Sources
Last reviewed: 19 October 2026.
