GRASP.
Grasp · Comprehension Index Scan Report

Who still understands tailwindlabs/tailwindcss?

Computed from git metadata only; no source code contents were read.
touch-weighted · 3-year history window · last commit 65d ago · scores are comparable only against same-mode scans

Grasp Score
57
touch-weighted living knowledge across the repo
Active humans
12 / 143
contributors active in last 90 days vs. all-time
AI-attributed minimum
≥ 0.7%
hard evidence only. Just 43% of commits here carry any attribution signal, so the real share is higher
Inactive share
57.4%
work by authors with no commit in the window; silence, not proof of departure
Composition
41/27/16/15%
source / tests / docs / config share of scored work
Living, source only
58%
the headline recomputed over hand-written source alone
Score stability
volatile
90-day-cliff variant reads 0%–75% across 60/90/180-day activity windows; read the width before the middle value
Squash-merged history: 87% of the commits analysed here collapsed a whole pull request into one commit by one author. Squashing credits a single person for everyone's work and can strip the co-author trailers that name the rest (measured across heavy squashers, roughly a quarter to a third of squash commits still carry them, and those are credited), so for this repository the concentration figures are an upper bound, the bus factors are a lower bound, and the AI-attribution minimum is lower than it would be with the same work merged conventionally. That information is destroyed at merge time and cannot be recovered from the repository, so it is reported rather than corrected. Comparisons against a project that does not squash are comparisons across two different record-keeping systems.

Dark-code ranking

Modules ranked by comprehension risk: the unknown share, amplified by ongoing change and thin ownership. The green meter is living knowledge.

ModuleRiskLiving knowledgeAI-attr. InactiveBusHeat/180d
playgroundsMED 63
28%
55%25%126
packages/@tailwindcss-standaloneLOW 48
43%
24%49%119
integrationsLOW 47
53%
1%67%173
(root)LOW 44
56%
2%59%1155
packages/tailwindcssLOW 44
56%
2%60%1268
packages/@tailwindcss-viteLOW 42
53%
2%62%127
packages/@tailwindcss-nodeLOW 42
55%
4%55%135
packages/@tailwindcss-postcssLOW 39
56%
1%57%128
packages/@tailwindcss-upgradeLOW 39
59%
1%41%138
cratesLOW 37
63%
1%39%1227
.githubLOW 37
59%
0%48%128
packages/@tailwindcss-browserLOW 37
56%
5%54%116
packages/@tailwindcss-cliLOW 37
61%
2%45%137
testsLOW 33
56%
0%98%00
srcLOW 32
57%
0%94%00
scriptsLOW 29
62%
0%51%11
oxideLOW 28
62%
0%74%10

One commit touched 56% of every file changed in this window. Wide, shallow commits, a formatter run or a license-header pass, add weight for their author across the whole surface while changing little. Worth looking at what that commit was before crediting the score to its author.

Public-repo caveat: "departed" includes drive-by contributors, overstating attrition relative to a company repo with a real roster. Engagement is a proxy for comprehension. Treat it as a potential indicator rather than a diagnosis.