NVIDIA/cudf - Open Source PR Review Scorecard

cuDF - GPU DataFrame Library

C-Rank Grade: B (Solid) - 53/100

External PR Merge Rate: 48%

Response Time: 7d

First Timer Success: 46%

Frequently Asked Questions

Is NVIDIA/cudf welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

NVIDIA/cudf has a recorded first-timer success rate of 45.7%. Repositories ranked B 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 NVIDIA/cudf respond to incoming external pull requests in approximately 157.3 hours on average. Keeping PRs focused on single tasks and ensuring tests pass helps maintainers review faster.

What does the 53.2 C-Rank™ score (B 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 53.2 places NVIDIA/cudf in the B tier.

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for NVIDIA/cudf?

The external contributor pull request merge rate for NVIDIA/cudf is 48.1%, based on public PR activity from non-core contributors.

Are there Good First Issues available in NVIDIA/cudf?

NVIDIA/cudf currently has 2 active issue(s) tagged with beginner-friendly labels like "good first issue", "beginner", or "up-for-grabs".

NVIDIA
NVIDIA/cudfB•Solid9.8k
GitHub
Back to Explorer
NVIDIA

NVIDIA/cudf

9,774
InactiveB•Solid(53/100)C++

cuDF - GPU DataFrame Library

GitHub
Compare••
Jump to:

AI Maintainer Review Guidelines

Review Persona

Active Open-Source Maintainer

Warmth Score
7.8/10
Patience Score
8.2/10
Nitpick Rate
20%

Active maintainer team in NVIDIA/cudf welcoming community pull requests and bug fixes.

Top PR Submission Do's

  • •Ensure code complies with repository style conventions
  • •Keep PRs focused and well-documented

Top PR Friction Pitfalls (Don'ts)

  • •Do not submit unlinked PRs without context
  • •Do not break existing automated test suites
Response Velocity
6 days+
Standard maintainer review cycle

Average Response Latency

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

Merge Efficiency
48.1%
Moderate PR acceptance rate

External Acceptance Rate

Percentage of community pull requests successfully merged into main.

First-Timer Success
45.7%
Accepts new contributor PRs

First PR Conversion

Rate at which developers submitting their first repository PR succeed.

Active Maintainers
73 core
Highly collaborative maintainer core
Diagnostic Health HUD
48.1%
Merge Gauge
45.7%
1st-Timer
Community Vibe33/100

Embed C-Rank Badge

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

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

Active Good First Issues (3)

View on GitHub

Is your feature request related to a problem? parquet::fetch_bloom_filters_to_device treats any size-zero range as “no filter” and skips it. Consequently, these chunks are never bloom-pruned. This behavior is correct but suboptimal: pruning is silently lost because the device caster conservatively returns membership true for empty spans in bloom_filter_reader.cu. The default read_parquet path already handles this case. read_bloom_filters substitutes a speculative 256-byte initial read, clamped to the datasource size, using speculative_read_size in: https://github.com/rapidsai/cudf/blob/3b3cea4d9669b9db1e35769ea727514eac3cb3e7/cpp/src/io/parquet/bloom_filter_reader.cu#L363-L366 Describe the solution you’d like Handle this case in fetch_bloom_filters_to_device_impl in cpp/src/io/parquet/io_utils/parquet_io_utils.cpp This function owns the datasources and can therefore clamp reads safely. The hybrid-scan metadata layer cannot do so because it has no access to the datasources. Phase

📅 Opened Aug 3, 2026💬 4 comments
Quality: 40/100Contribute

Report incorrect documentation Location of incorrect documentation cudf/source/user_guide/10min.ipynb Describe the problems or issues found in the documentation Currently this notebook (and other notebooks that use Dask) isn't being validated in our CI https://github.com/rapidsai/cudf/blob/62387458abe94670c386460a39c877c7530d544d/ci/test_notebooks.sh#L52 And it's likely that #20925 broke something in this notebook when run by-hand. Suggested fix for documentation Create 2, 10 minutes to [cuDF|Dask-cuDF] notebooks so we can at least validate a (probably commonly seen) introductory cuDF notebook Investigate other notebooks that might be running Dask and split them out into other notebooks if appropriate. (The CI currently only skips validating 10min.ipynb because of Dask usage)

📅 Opened Feb 6, 2026💬 2 comments
Quality: 40/100Contribute

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe. Regex features are available in cudf string APIs and nvtext APIs. grep is widely used utility. It would cool to try creating cudfgrep with cudf/nvtext and document the throughput. Describe the solution you'd like Create cudfgrep utility in our python codebase or a C++ example with libcudf APIs. Additional context Benchmark it without GDS (most common usecase). Benchmark on GPU in PCIE, and on Grace systems with fast C2C.

📅 Opened Jan 16, 2026💬 7 comments
Quality: 30/100Contribute
Looking for more C++ beginner tasks?Explore C++ 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 NVIDIA/cudf

When evaluating whether to contribute to NVIDIA/cudf, 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 NVIDIA/cudf acknowledge new external contributions in approximately 6 days+. Out of all submitted pull requests from non-core authors in the last 180-day window, 48.1% were successfully merged into the primary branch.

Frequently Asked Questions - Contributing to NVIDIA/cudf

01

Is NVIDIA/cudf welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

NVIDIA/cudf has a recorded first-timer success rate of 45.7%. Repositories ranked Solid 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 ~6 days+. Keeping PRs scoped to single concerns and ensuring CI checks succeed will optimize review turnaround.

03

What does the 53.2 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 53.2 places NVIDIA/cudf in the Solid tier.

04

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for NVIDIA/cudf?

The external pull request merge rate is 48.1%. 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 NVIDIA/cudf?

Yes, NVIDIA/cudf currently has 2 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 NVIDIA/cudf 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.