4 ms·
This problem could be solved if Github simply sorted the list of forks by stars instead of alphabetically.
by exciteabletom 5y ago
This problem could be solved if Github simply sorted the list of forks by stars instead of alphabetically.
- oezi 5y agoThat is a good idea but they actually also should do: - hide any repo that hasn't seen any commits - show commits ahead and behind as well as number of tags - include issue tracker activity - highlight those forks that were renamed which is often an indicator of a new package/gem being released from this fork - Show a link from the main page of a repository to the most active fork to make it clear that there is an active fork at all.
- zxcvbn4038 5y agoMore active repos don't necessarily have more stars, maybe a better way to sort would be to have main repo followed by number of commits ahead, then number of commits behind. Most often what I find is a repo will have 3-5 dozen forks and the vast majority will either be far behind or have one or two localizations. It is very rare that I find something that someone has really forked and started doing active development on.
- trinovantes 5y agoI think sorting forks by most recent commit would good enough. Not sure why GitHub doesn't do more to help with discoverability
- tessierashpool 5y agoI wholeheartedly agree with this. I think it's just a blind spot they have, although back in the day a GitHubber told me it was also about maintaining an agnostic approach to governance. btw, iirc GitLab does give you the option of sorting by most recent commit.