Community Terrestrial Systems Model (includes the Community Land Model of CESM)
C-Rank Grade: A (Welcoming) - 62/100
External PR Merge Rate: 33%
Response Time: 2h
First Timer Success: 25%
ESCOMP/CTSM has a recorded first-timer success rate of 25.0%. Repositories ranked A typically provide actionable feedback during code reviews and actively nurture new community contributors.
Maintainers in ESCOMP/CTSM respond to incoming external pull requests in approximately 2.2 hours on average. Keeping PRs focused on single tasks and ensuring tests pass helps maintainers review faster.
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 62.2 places ESCOMP/CTSM in the A tier.
The external contributor pull request merge rate for ESCOMP/CTSM is 33.3%, based on public PR activity from non-core contributors.
ESCOMP/CTSM currently has 4 active issue(s) tagged with beginner-friendly labels like "good first issue", "beginner", or "up-for-grabs".
Active maintainer team in ESCOMP/CTSM welcoming community pull requests and bug fixes.
Average Response Latency
Tracks hours until a maintainer leaves a review, comment, or PR response.
External Acceptance Rate
Percentage of community pull requests successfully merged into main.
First PR Conversion
Rate at which developers submitting their first repository PR succeed.
Show contributors that your repository actively reviews and merges external pull requests.
[](https://getmerged.abhishekco.de/ESCOMP/CTSM?utm_source=github&utm_medium=badge)
Historical health & responsiveness evolution
External PR acceptance
First PR success rate
50% receive response in
90% receive response in
Maintainer review activity heatmap & prime window prediction
Calculating local time...
Calculating local time...
Detected: UTC
Maintainers are most responsive around 22:00 UTC (22:00 UTC in your timezone). Recommended submission window is Tuesday - Thursday from 21:00 to 01:00 UTC (21:00 - 01:00 UTC local).
Maintainer Strategy: Maintainer Sweet Spot: PRs under 150 lines merge in ~4 hours (42% approval). Large PRs (>500 lines) take ~11 hours (15% approval). Keep your diff compact for rapid review.
Brief summary of bug There are two FATES boundary conditions relating to liquid water that that are correctly set in wrap_btran() but set to total soil water in dynamics_driv(). The incorrect dynamics_driv() calls overwrite the correct wrap_btran() calls, causing incorrect boundary conditions, but only in the first timestep of the day—see where those subroutines are called relative to each other in clm_drv(). (Full disclosure: This bug was identified by Claude during my moss work, but I've traced it myself to check. I've also typed this issue out myself.) General bug information CTSM version you are using: ctsm5.4.054 Does this bug cause significantly incorrect results in the model's science? Probably not meaningfully so, but answers are affected. Configurations affected: Science affected in FATES runs with soil ice present: Runs with any PFT that is "stress (hydro) deciduous" (4 in default FATES parameter file) or "stress (hydro) semi-deciduous" (none). Maybe others, but that first
Brief summary of bug $ grep -R -n qflx_evap_can_col ./* ./biogeophys/WaterFluxType.F90:48: real(r8), pointer :: qflx_evap_can_col (:) ! col evaporation from leaves and stems (mm H2O/s) (+ = to atm) ./biogeophys/WaterFluxType.F90:239: call AllocateVar1d(var = this%qflx_evap_can_col, name = 'qflx_evap_can_col', & General bug information CTSM version you are using: master/latest Does this bug cause significantly incorrect results in the model's science? No Configurations affected: All Details of bug This should not even be allocated ever. There is qflx_evap_veg_col Important details of your setup / configuration so we can reproduce the bug Important output or errors that show the problem
Because this is confusing: CTSM/src/biogeochem/CNPhenologyMod.F90 Line 2095 in 19d9b8a leafout => crop_inst%gddtsoi_patch , & ! Input: [real(r8) (:) ] gdd from top soil layer temperature Seemingly this is the only place it's used.
We commonly need to check that soil layers are oversaturated and, if so, move the excess soil water up by one soil layer (or runoff if the top layer is oversaturated). This happens in least three places. This should be modularized to avoid repeated code.
Rate what actually matters after opening a pull request here.
Rate your first-hand PR experience (review speed, maintainer responsiveness, and onboarding ease) to help other contributors.
When evaluating whether to contribute to ESCOMP/CTSM, 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 ESCOMP/CTSM acknowledge new external contributions in approximately 2 hours. Out of all submitted pull requests from non-core authors in the last 180-day window, 33.3% were successfully merged into the primary branch.
ESCOMP/CTSM has a recorded first-timer success rate of 25.0%. Repositories ranked Welcoming typically provide actionable feedback during code reviews and actively nurture new community contributors.
The initial maintainer response time averages ~2 hours. Keeping PRs scoped to single concerns and ensuring CI checks succeed will optimize review turnaround.
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 62.2 places ESCOMP/CTSM in the Welcoming tier.
The external pull request merge rate is 33.3%. GetMerged isolates non-core community contributions so external developers get an accurate benchmark of PR acceptance probability.
Yes, ESCOMP/CTSM currently has 4 active issue(s) tagged with beginner-friendly labels. You can inspect these directly from the repository issues tab.
All metrics displayed for ESCOMP/CTSM 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.