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 17d ago · scores are comparable only against same-mode scans

Grasp Score

touch-weighted living knowledge across the repo

Active humans

30 / 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

75.4%

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

42%

the headline recomputed over hand-written source alone

Score stability

stable

90-day-cliff variant reads 22%–28% 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.

Module	Risk	Living knowledge	AI-attr.	Inactive	Bus	Heat/180d
packages/reactivity	MED 59	38%	0%	84%	0	39
packages/runtime-core	MED 53	47%	0%	70%	1	114
packages/runtime-dom	MED 52	44%	0%	75%	1	37
packages/compiler-sfc	MED 51	46%	1%	70%	1	40
.github	MED 51	44%	0%	81%	0	33
packages/dts-test	MED 51	32%	0%	83%	1	0
packages/compiler-core	MED 50	45%	0%	80%	0	34
packages/vue	MED 50	45%	0%	76%	1	32
(root)	LOW 49	48%	0%	76%	1	40
packages/server-renderer	LOW 49	51%	0%	64%	1	62
scripts	LOW 49	35%	0%	89%	0	1
packages/runtime-test	LOW 47	37%	0%	89%	0	0
packages/sfc-playground	LOW 47	38%	0%	83%	1	0
packages/shared	LOW 46	44%	0%	76%	1	17
packages/compiler-dom	LOW 46	45%	0%	80%	1	15
packages-private	LOW 45	48%	2%	77%	1	22
packages/compiler-ssr	LOW 45	46%	0%	72%	1	16
packages/vue-compat	LOW 45	46%	0%	75%	1	16

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.