The following metrics are not a measure of #foss software quality and impact:
github stars; number of downloads; number of commits; number of lines of code; number of closed issues
Rewarding developers based on those metrics harms quality, the ecosystem and, ultimately, the end users.
@federico3 likewise with commit frequency/recency. Programs are not produce—we shouldn't assign high value to "freshness".
"ugh, repo is inactive" reactions presume that correctness is not and cannot be a thing and that a project can never (shouldn't?) even approach a state of being "finished".
People seem to use activity as an inexpensive but flawed way to approximate developer responsiveness. If that's what you care about, though, then focus on that instead of inaccurate proxy measures.
@colby
Absolutely yes. If anything, frequent breaking changes and unnecessary code churn can be a symptom of poor planning or lack of maturity.