Example, using the situation in
https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=77134 where I have "dirvish" installed from both non-GNU ELPA and MELPA, claims that MELPA is obsolete when it is actually the more recent version. Not having dived deep, I see two potential areas of false positives in the code. One is comparing incompatible version numbers from differing archive sources; e.g., non-GNU ELPA says "2.2.7" while MELPA says "20250319.1508". The other suggests unsigned packages have lower precedence than signed packages independent of their recency. Again, these could be wrong but I looked only for a minute.