Apicurio/apicurio-registry - Open Source PR Review Scorecard

An API/Schema registry - stores APIs and Schemas.

C-Rank Grade: A (Welcoming) - 67/100

External PR Merge Rate: 60%

Response Time: -

First Timer Success: 34%

Frequently Asked Questions

Is Apicurio/apicurio-registry welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

Apicurio/apicurio-registry has a recorded first-timer success rate of 34.0%. Repositories ranked A typically provide actionable feedback during code reviews and actively nurture new community contributors.

How fast can I expect code review feedback on my pull request?

Maintainers in Apicurio/apicurio-registry respond to incoming external pull requests in approximately 0.0 hours on average. Keeping PRs focused on single tasks and ensuring tests pass helps maintainers review faster.

What does the 66.6 C-Rank™ score (A Tier) represent?

The C-Rank™ system evaluates GitHub projects on a 0–100 scale using real data: PR merge rates, review turnaround time, active maintainer presence, and first-time contributor success. A score of 66.6 places Apicurio/apicurio-registry in the A tier.

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for Apicurio/apicurio-registry?

The external contributor pull request merge rate for Apicurio/apicurio-registry is 60.0%, based on public PR activity from non-core contributors.

Are there Good First Issues available in Apicurio/apicurio-registry?

Apicurio/apicurio-registry currently has 26 active issue(s) tagged with beginner-friendly labels like "good first issue", "beginner", or "up-for-grabs".

Apicurio
Apicurio/apicurio-registryA•Welcoming942
GitHub
Back to Explorer
Apicurio

Apicurio/apicurio-registry

942
Active (30d)A•Welcoming(67/100)Java

An API/Schema registry - stores APIs and Schemas.

GitHub
Compare••
Jump to:

AI Maintainer Review Guidelines

Review Persona

Welcoming Community Builder

Warmth Score
8.3/10
Patience Score
8.4/10
Nitpick Rate
40%

Highly welcoming maintainers in Apicurio/apicurio-registry. Prompt code reviews with positive guidance for new contributors.

Top PR Submission Do's

  • •Ensure code complies with the project coding style
  • •Keep PRs scoped to a single concern
  • •Include context and link to the related issue

Top PR Friction Pitfalls (Don'ts)

  • •Do not submit PRs without linking an issue
  • •Do not break existing tests without fixing them
  • •Do not mix unrelated refactors in a single PR
Response Velocity
-
No reviewer activity recorded

Average Response Latency

Tracks hours until a maintainer leaves a review, comment, or PR response.

Merge Efficiency
60.0%
Moderate PR acceptance rate

External Acceptance Rate

Percentage of community pull requests successfully merged into main.

First-Timer Success
34.0%
Accepts new contributor PRs

First PR Conversion

Rate at which developers submitting their first repository PR succeed.

Active Maintainers
138 core
Highly collaborative maintainer core
Diagnostic Health HUD
60.0%
Merge Gauge
34.0%
1st-Timer
Community Vibe34/100

Embed C-Rank Badge

Show contributors that your repository actively reviews and merges external pull requests.

GetMerged C-Rank badge for Apicurio/apicurio-registry
[![GetMerged C-Rank](https://getmerged.abhishekco.de/api/badge/Apicurio/apicurio-registry)](https://getmerged.abhishekco.de/Apicurio/apicurio-registry?utm_source=github&utm_medium=badge)

Active Good First Issues (5)

View on GitHub

A JSON body that fails to deserialize on a ccompat endpoint gets a v3 ProblemDetails error instead of the Confluent {error_code, message} shape, and the response leaks the server exception class name. Follow-up from #10150 (review item O1), which moved the API-surface dispatch into ApiSurfaceResolver but intentionally left this mapper out of scope. Reproduce On current main, against a running registry: POST /apis/ccompat/v7/subjects/{subject}/versions Content-Type: application/json {"schema": {"not": "a string"}} returns 400: {"detail":"BadRequestException: Cannot deserialize value of type `java.lang.String` from Object value (token `JsonToken.START_OBJECT`)","title":"Cannot deserialize value of type `java.lang.String` from Object value (token `JsonToken.START_OBJECT`)","status":400,"name":"BadRequestException"} By contrast, a ccompat 404 from the same API correctly returns {"message":"Subject 'does-not-exist' not found.","error_code":40401}. Cause app/src/main/java/io/apicurio/regis

📅 Opened Oct 9, 2026💬 2 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute

Part of #10297. Can start now. Held until Wednesday 14 October for a contributor who asked about this work earlier. After that, anyone can claim it with /assign-me. The Confluent-compatible endpoints /compatibility/subjects/{subject}/versions/{version} accept verbose, documented as "includes reason when compatibility fails", but ignore it (P7). CompatibilityResourceImpl (v7) catches the RuleViolationException and returns only is_compatible: false. Confluent's client reads messages, and falls back to "Schemas are incompatible" without it. Work Add messages (array of strings) to CompatibilityCheckResponse in the ccompat v7 and v8 OpenAPI documents. With verbose=true, fill it from the violation's causes, e.g. "<description> at <context>"; without it, leave it out, as Confluent does. Check the v8 delegate copies the field. Done when ConfluentClientTest asserts the messages returned to Confluent's client for an incompatible schema with verbose=true, and their absence without it.

📅 Opened Oct 7, 2026💬 2 comments
Quality: 80/100Contribute

Part of #10297. Waits for #10472. Uses #10471's endpoint; until it's merged, mock it. Work For a cause with a code, fetch its explanation from #10471 on demand (not for every cause up front), and cache it for the session. Help: render it as Markdown. It must be sanitised: use marked and DOMPurify, which the UI already gets through Monaco, as direct dependencies. Examples: show them as schema pairs, using the diff editor. 404 or no code: show nothing extra. Done when A Playwright test with a mocked explanation: help and an example are shown, and a cause without a code shows none.

📅 Opened Oct 7, 2026💬 1 comment
Quality: 80/100Contribute

Part of #10297. Waits for #10472; works with today's context and picks up the new pointers when present. Work Pointer to text: map a JSON Pointer to a text range on the text as displayed. The Content tab pretty-prints JSON and can convert to YAML, so ranges must come from the displayed text. yaml's parseDocument (already a dependency) handles both. Walk the pointer and fall back to the deepest part that resolves (P6). Markers: Monaco markers on each cause's range (RegistryEditors.tsx exposes the editor through onMount), and a click on a cause scrolls to it. Both sides: use proposed.pointer and existing.pointer when present, with context as the proposed pointer otherwise. Show both documents through the existing diff editor (DiffView). Under a FULL level, show each cause's direction. Referenced artifacts: a location with a reference is in a referenced artifact. Don't apply its pointer to the main document; list it without a highlight (showing the referenced artifact can come later). No

📅 Opened Oct 7, 2026💬 3 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute

Part of #10297. Can start now; doesn't need the new API fields. Held until Wednesday 14 October for a contributor who asked about this work earlier. After that, anyone can claim it with /assign-me. Rule violations are shown by InvalidContentModal (ui/ui-app/src/app/components/modals/) as a flat list: context in bold, description under it. The content the user submitted is discarded before the error arrives (P5): ArtifactPage and GroupPage close the modal before the request, and the create and test modals reset on reopen. Work Keep the content: keep the submitted content and its content type with the error, in every flow that can get a rule violation: create artifact, create version, test (dry run), finalize draft (see the flows listed in #10297). The report: a component for compatibility violations, which replaces the list in InvalidContentModal for them: causes grouped by location; the submitted content shown read-only, with a way to show the version it was compared against, when kn

📅 Opened Oct 7, 2026💬 4 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute
Looking for more Java beginner tasks?Explore Java GFI

Contributor Community Vibe Feedback

Rate what actually matters after opening a pull request here.

Have you contributed to this repo?

Rate your first-hand PR experience (review speed, maintainer responsiveness, and onboarding ease) to help other contributors.

3 ratings required
Maintainer helpfulness
Review speed
Beginner friendliness

Contributor Compatibility & Review Speed Analysis for Apicurio/apicurio-registry

When evaluating whether to contribute to Apicurio/apicurio-registry, response velocity and maintainer engagement are crucial. GetMerged continuously tracks pull request trajectories, first-comment latency, and code review rounds to help developers avoid submitting pull requests to backlogged repositories.

Currently, maintainers of Apicurio/apicurio-registry acknowledge new external contributions in approximately -. Out of all submitted pull requests from non-core authors in the last 180-day window, 60.0% were successfully merged into the primary branch.

Frequently Asked Questions - Contributing to Apicurio/apicurio-registry

01

Is Apicurio/apicurio-registry welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

Apicurio/apicurio-registry has a recorded first-timer success rate of 34.0%. Repositories ranked Welcoming typically provide actionable feedback during code reviews and actively nurture new community contributors.

02

How fast can I expect code review feedback on my pull request?

The initial maintainer response time averages ~-. Keeping PRs scoped to single concerns and ensuring CI checks succeed will optimize review turnaround.

03

What does the 66.6 C-Rank™ score represent?

The C-Rank™ index scores repositories on a 0 to 100 scale using an objective formula: external PR merge rates, initial response speed, active maintainer count, and first-time contributor retention. A score of 66.6 places Apicurio/apicurio-registry in the Welcoming tier.

04

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for Apicurio/apicurio-registry?

The external pull request merge rate is 60.0%. GetMerged isolates non-core community contributions so external developers get an accurate benchmark of PR acceptance probability.

05

Are there beginner Good First Issues open in Apicurio/apicurio-registry?

Yes, Apicurio/apicurio-registry currently has 26 active issue(s) tagged with beginner-friendly labels. You can inspect these directly from the repository issues tab.

GetMerged C-Rank™ Indexing Standard

All metrics displayed for Apicurio/apicurio-registry are automatically retrieved via the public GitHub API and recalculated daily. Insider pull requests submitted by repository owners or organization members are excluded from merge rate calculations to preserve objective external contributor statistics.