8363750c13
- 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>
3.0 KiB
3.0 KiB
Project Evaluation Guide
How to evaluate open-source projects before contributing.
Quick Health Check
# 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| API docs | Complete | Outdated |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
# 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