3 ms·
This is cool - I can think of some projects that are amazing as first contributors, and others I can think of that are terrible. One thing I think the tool doe
by ryanisnan 3y ago
This is cool - I can think of some projects that are amazing as first contributors, and others I can think of that are terrible.
One thing I think the tool doesn't address is why someone should contribute to a particular project. Having stars is interesting, and a proxy for at least historical activity, but also kind of useless here - take argoproj/argo-cd [1] as an example - 14.5k stars, with a backlog of 2.7k issues and an issue tracker that's a real mess.
Either way, I think this tool is neat for trying to gain some experience in a project purely based on language.
[1] https://github.com/argoproj/argo-cd/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+sort%3Acreated-asc https://github.com/argoproj/argo-cd/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3...
- ryanisnan 3y agoThis kind of speaks to how stars on GitHub are kind of a mess themselves. What would be really interesting is if there were some kind of a metric that captured oss-contributor sentiment - projects that were easy to contribute to, with healthy ecosystems, would have higher scores, and projects where your PRs sit forever half-reviewed, or unmerged, get lower scores.