Files
claude-code-skills-reference/github-contributor/references/project_evaluation.md
daymade 8363750c13 Release v1.22.0: Add skill-reviewer and github-contributor
- Add skill-reviewer v1.0.0 for reviewing Claude Code skills against best practices
  - Self-review mode: validate your own skills before publishing
  - External review mode: evaluate others' skill repositories
  - Auto-PR mode: fork, improve, submit PRs with additive-only changes
  - Auto-install dependencies: automatically installs skill-creator if missing

- Add github-contributor v1.0.0 for strategic open-source contribution
  - Four contribution types: Documentation, Code Quality, Bug Fixes, Features
  - Project selection criteria and red flags
  - PR excellence workflow and reputation building ladder
  - GitHub CLI commands and conventional commit format

- Update marketplace to v1.22.0 with 30 skills
- Update documentation (README, README.zh-CN, CLAUDE.md, CHANGELOG)

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-01-15 23:02:40 +08:00

150 lines
3.0 KiB
Markdown

# Project Evaluation Guide
How to evaluate open-source projects before contributing.
## Quick Health Check
```bash
# Check recent activity
gh repo view owner/repo --json updatedAt,stargazersCount,openIssues
# Check PR response time
gh pr list --repo owner/repo --state merged --limit 10
# Check issue activity
gh issue list --repo owner/repo --limit 20
```
## Evaluation Criteria
### 1. Activity Level
| Signal | Good | Bad |
|--------|------|-----|
| Last commit | < 1 month | > 6 months |
| Open PRs | Being reviewed | Ignored |
| Issue responses | Within days | Never |
| Release frequency | Regular | Years ago |
### 2. Community Health
| Signal | Good | Bad |
|--------|------|-----|
| CONTRIBUTING.md | Exists, detailed | Missing |
| Code of Conduct | Present | Missing |
| Issue templates | Well-structured | None |
| Discussion tone | Friendly, helpful | Hostile |
### 3. Maintainer Engagement
| Signal | Good | Bad |
|--------|------|-----|
| Review comments | Constructive | Dismissive |
| Response time | Days | Months |
| Merge rate | Regular merges | Stale PRs |
| New contributor PRs | Welcomed | Ignored |
### 4. Documentation Quality
| Signal | Good | Bad |
|--------|------|-----|
| README | Clear, comprehensive | Minimal |
| Getting started | Easy to follow | Missing |
| API docs | Complete | Outdated |
| Examples | Working, relevant | Broken |
## Scoring System
Rate each category 1-5:
```
Activity Level: _/5
Community Health: _/5
Maintainer Engage: _/5
Documentation: _/5
----------------------------
Total: _/20
```
**Interpretation:**
- 16-20: Excellent choice
- 12-15: Good, proceed with caution
- 8-11: Consider carefully
- < 8: Avoid or expect delays
## Red Flags
### Immediate Disqualifiers
- No commits in 1+ year
- Maintainer explicitly stepped away
- Project archived
- License issues
### Warning Signs
- Many open PRs without review
- Hostile responses to contributors
- No clear contribution path
- Overly complex setup
## Green Flags
### Strong Indicators
- "good first issue" labels maintained
- Active Discord/Slack community
- Regular release schedule
- Responsive maintainers
- Clear roadmap
### Bonus Points
- Funded/sponsored project
- Multiple active maintainers
- Good test coverage
- CI/CD pipeline
## Research Checklist
```
Project Evaluation:
- [ ] Check GitHub Insights
- [ ] Read recent issues
- [ ] Review merged PRs
- [ ] Check contributor guide
- [ ] Look for "good first issue"
- [ ] Assess community tone
- [ ] Verify active maintenance
- [ ] Confirm compatible license
```
## Finding Projects
### By Interest
```bash
# Find by topic
gh search repos "topic:cli" --sort=stars
# Find by language
gh search repos "language:python" --sort=stars
# Find with good first issues
gh search issues "good first issue" --language=rust
```
### By Need
- Tools you use daily
- Libraries in your projects
- Frameworks you're learning
- Problems you've encountered
### Curated Lists
- awesome-for-beginners
- first-timers-only
- up-for-grabs.net
- goodfirstissue.dev