GRASP.
Grasp · Comprehension Index Scan Report

Who still understands vuejs/core?

Computed from git metadata only; no source code contents were read.
touch-weighted · 3-year history window · last commit 59d ago · scores are comparable only against same-mode scans

Grasp Score
38
touch-weighted living knowledge across the repo
Active humans
12 / 281
contributors active in last 90 days vs. all-time
AI-attributed minimum
≥ 0.3%
hard evidence only. Just 25% of commits here carry any attribution signal, so the real share is higher
Inactive share
83.7%
work by authors with no commit in the window; silence, not proof of departure
Composition
59/26/5/10%
source / tests / docs / config share of scored work
Living, source only
36%
the headline recomputed over hand-written source alone
Score stability
volatile
90-day-cliff variant reads 0%–27% across 60/90/180-day activity windows; read the width before the middle value
Squash-merged history: 70% 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
packages/reactivityMED 64
32%
0%90%039
packages/runtime-coreMED 60
40%
0%79%1114
packages/runtime-domMED 59
37%
0%86%137
packages/compiler-sfcMED 58
39%
1%79%140
packages/server-rendererMED 57
43%
0%76%162
packages/compiler-coreMED 57
38%
0%89%034
.githubMED 57
38%
0%90%033
(root)MED 56
41%
0%80%140
packages/vueMED 56
38%
0%81%132
packages/dts-testMED 55
27%
0%98%00
scriptsMED 53
29%
0%98%01
packages/sharedMED 52
38%
0%84%117
packages-privateMED 51
41%
2%83%122
packages/compiler-domMED 51
38%
0%87%115
packages/vue-compatMED 51
39%
0%83%116
packages/runtime-testMED 51
32%
0%96%00
packages/sfc-playgroundMED 51
32%
0%96%00
packages/compiler-ssrMED 50
39%
0%80%116

One commit touched 77% 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.