Yoopta-Editor
Build Notion-like, Craft-like, Coda-like, Medium-like editors with Yoopta
Runssource: GitHubhomepageTypeScriptMITcommit 070349b1cd70
TypeScript, MIT licensed. The project labels itself: contenteditable, editor, hacktoberfest, javascript, notion, notion alternative, notion editor and react.
Yoopta-Editor runs. An Argusic agent installed it in 1 minute and hit 2 errors on a clean machine with no GPU, and the whole session was recorded.
All 29 packages build successfully with Node 20.19.0 (downloaded as a portable binary). Test suite passes 610/611 tests across 34 test files. The next-app-example (Next.js 16 playground) builds and statically generates all pages.
What the agent ended up with on a clean machine, in its own words. How this is measured
Measured by Argusic on a fresh machine every time. Every number links to its evidence. Argusic Score 90 of 100 (the mean of this project's run scores).
At a glance
Subject data from GitHub, linked at the top of this page, refreshed . Test data by Argusic (CC BY 4.0); every number links to a run page with the full log, the recording, and their sha256 hashes.
What was measured
From the run that decided this verdict. Every line is a recorded value, not an estimate.
What went wrong, in the agent's own words
The agent's own words, worst first, never rewritten into advice.
- Node.js 18.19.1 bundled in container is too old: yarn 4.12.0 works but some packages need newer Node (next-app-example requires >=20.9.0; vitest v4 requires >=22). Builds failed intermittently with signal 129 (SIGHUP) at default turbo concurrency of 30 due to resource contention.5 minutes
- 1 pre-existing test failure: packages/core/collaboration/src/with-collaboration.test.ts:232 - 'should auto-connect when connect is not false'. Implementation uses strict equality (config.connect === true) but test expects truthiness (connect !== false).
- Install time
- 1 minutes
- Cold machine to finish
- 20 minutes
- Errors hit and fixed
- 2 hit, 1 fixed with no human help
- Model tokens used
- 163,527
- Exact commit tested
- 070349b1cd70
- Container image
- sha256:4c3d41857be3
What was not measured
The other half, so you can see exactly how far this evidence goes. A gap is printed as a gap and never filled in.
- How the result was proved
- runs before 2026-09-07 did not record the command used to check the result
- Peak GPU memory
- this ran on a CPU machine, so there was no GPU to sample
- Behaviour over a long run
- each attempt uses the smallest documented settings and a fixed time budget, so this measures whether it runs, not how it holds up under load
The end of the recording
The last lines of the terminal session that decided this verdict, exactly as they were recorded.
=== FINAL STATE === With Node 20 (downloaded to /tmp/node-v20.19.0-linux-x64): - yarn install: OK (1345 packages, warnings only) - yarn build: OK (29/29 packages built, 28 cached + 1 fresh for next-app-example) - yarn test:run: 33/34 test files pass, 610/611 tests pass (1 pre-existing failure) The 1 pre-existing test failure: packages/core/collaboration/src/with-collaboration.test.ts:232 Test expects auto-connect when connect is not set, but implementation uses 'config.connect === true' (strict equality) instead of 'config.connect !== false' To use this repo, run: export PATH=/tmp/node-v20.19.0-linux-x64/bin:$PATH tokens used 163,527
Replay the whole session, every command from a clean machine to this point.
How it was tested
One agent, one container, no human help. It installs the project the way its own documentation says to, runs it, and fixes what breaks. Everything below is recorded as it happened: the terminal session, the log and the exact commit. The full method.
Strengths and limits
Measured facts, not opinions. How this is written.
What went well
- Reached a running state on a clean machine, with the session recorded.
- Installed in 1 minute.
- Ran without a GPU, so it does not need one to start.
- Licensed MIT, as reported by its host.
What did not, or is not known
- Hit 2 errors during setup, 1 of which were not solved.
- Measured once so far. A single attempt shows it can run, not that it runs reliably.
What it is a reasonable choice for
- Trying it on a laptop or a small server: it reached a running state without a GPU.
- A quick evaluation: it was running 1 minutes after the clone.
Also tested, in the same area
Every one of these was installed and run by Argusic on a clean machine. Nothing appears here that was not tested.
Run history
Topics (from GitHub)
contenteditableeditorhacktoberfestjavascriptnotionnotion-alternativenotion-editorreactrich-textrich-text-editorslatewysiwygwysiwyg-editor
Embed the badge
Markdown for the project README. It links back here; terms on the terms page.
[](https://argusic.com/subject/yoopta-editor)Questions
- Does Yoopta-Editor run?
- Yes. Yoopta-Editor runs. Argusic installed and launched it on a clean machine in 1 minutes, hitting 2 errors on the way, and recorded the session.
- How did Argusic test Yoopta-Editor?
- On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit 070349b1cd70. One attempt is recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.
- What did it cost to test Yoopta-Editor?
- The run that produced this verdict cost $0.10: real compute and model cost, not a list price per million tokens. It is recorded on that run's page.
- How long does Yoopta-Editor take to install?
- 1 minute in the run that decided this verdict, from a clean machine to a running state. That is one measured attempt, not an average.
- Does Yoopta-Editor need a GPU?
- Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.
- What goes wrong when installing Yoopta-Editor?
- 2 things broke in the recorded run, and 1 were fixed without human help. Each one, and the time it cost, is listed on this page.
- Where is the evidence for Yoopta-Editor?
- The recorded run is on this page, each linking to its full log and terminal recording, stored with a sha256 fingerprint so it cannot be quietly altered.