remoteintech/remote-jobs

Prefer upstream unless you specifically want an old, untouched snapshot. This fork does not show added capabilities and is far behind, so it is a poor choice for anyone who wants an actively maintained directory site.

Choose this fork only if you specifically want its older custom implementation and are prepared to maintain a large divergence. For most adopters, upstream is the better base because it is active, current, and much easier to extend.

Prefer upstream unless you specifically want an old snapshot. This fork has no visible added functionality and is far behind, so it is mainly useful as a static reference or a starting point for a custom rewind.

Choose this fork only if you want an old, stable snapshot to fork from. If you want a current, maintained remote-jobs directory or an up-to-date Eleventy/Node build, upstream is the better choice.

This fork is not a good choice if you want an up-to-date, maintained remote-jobs directory. It is only attractive as a dormant snapshot with no fork-specific changes to preserve.

Prefer upstream unless you specifically need this fork’s untouched historical snapshot. This fork offers no visible added capability and is far behind on upstream maintenance, so it is a poor choice for adopters who want a working, current directory site.

Choose this fork only if you specifically want an older, heavily customized baseline and are prepared to maintain it yourself. If you want an active, current directory site with intact contributor workflows, upstream is the better default.

Prefer upstream unless you want a personal, unmodified snapshot; this fork adds no clear capabilities and is substantially behind active development.

Prefer upstream unless you specifically want an archival, frozen copy. This fork has no visible enhancements and is far behind active upstream maintenance, so it is a poor choice for anyone planning to run or extend the project today.