QW-Group/ezquake-source - Open Source PR Review Scorecard

main ezQuake source code base

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

External PR Merge Rate: 50%

Response Time: 4d

First Timer Success: 50%

Frequently Asked Questions

Is QW-Group/ezquake-source welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

QW-Group/ezquake-source has a recorded first-timer success rate of 50.0%. 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 QW-Group/ezquake-source respond to incoming external pull requests in approximately 92.2 hours on average. Keeping PRs focused on single tasks and ensuring tests pass helps maintainers review faster.

What does the 52.6 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 52.6 places QW-Group/ezquake-source in the B tier.

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for QW-Group/ezquake-source?

The external contributor pull request merge rate for QW-Group/ezquake-source is 50.0%, based on public PR activity from non-core contributors.

Are there Good First Issues available in QW-Group/ezquake-source?

QW-Group/ezquake-source currently has 1 active issue(s) tagged with beginner-friendly labels like "good first issue", "beginner", or "up-for-grabs".

QW-Group
QW-Group/ezquake-sourceB•Solid417
GitHub
Back to Explorer
QW-Group

QW-Group/ezquake-source

417
Active (30d)B•Solid(53/100)Low Sample (<20 PRs)C

main ezQuake source code base

GitHub
Compare••
Jump to:

AI Maintainer Review Guidelines

Review Persona

Empathetic Technical Mentor

Warmth Score
7.5/10
Patience Score
8.2/10
Nitpick Rate
20%

Collaborative maintainer environment in QW-Group/ezquake-source. Reviews community pull requests with focus on project quality.

What Contributors Actually Say

Discussions in QW-Group/ezquake-source focus heavily on practical implementation feedback, code formatting standards, and issue reproduction details.

Hidden Friction Signals

Unlinked PRs without issue context and changes that fail automated test suites face the highest review friction.

Unwritten Rules

  • •1) Keep PR scope strictly aligned with the linked issue.
  • •2) Ensure local linters pass before opening a review.
  • •3) Maintain full test coverage for modified logic.

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
3 days+
Standard maintainer review cycle

Average Response Latency

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

Merge Efficiency
50.0%
Moderate PR acceptance rate

External Acceptance Rate

Percentage of community pull requests successfully merged into main.

First-Timer Success
50.0%
Accepts new contributor PRs

First PR Conversion

Rate at which developers submitting their first repository PR succeed.

Active Maintainers
2 core
Small core review team
Diagnostic Health HUD
50.0%
Merge Gauge
50.0%
1st-Timer
Community Vibe35/100

Embed C-Rank Badge

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

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

Active Good First Issues (1)

View on GitHub

The initial goal of loading LIGHTING_E5BGR9 was to allow mappers to omit RGBLIGHTING and vanilla lighting, and getting that merged before a bunch of exploit fixes got merged, thus bringing up the base compatibility level in clients used. This was accomplished by porting the support from QuakeSpasm-Spiked, pretty much line by line. The downside of this approach is that it's clamped to SDR and by doing so, luxels that have some or all components above 1.0 may get clamped to 1.0. In the fragment shader the texture color is multiplied by the lightmap color, which in the case of 1.0 results in just reproducing the texture color even if the color was actually of another hue above vec3(1.0, 1.0, 1.0). In more simple words, if a surface is super bright green, to the point where it's percieved as burning bright, but fades through a green gradient over the distance it lights up, then surfaces near that bright surface will show in their original texture color until the light intensity has fallen

📅 Opened Jan 27, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 70/100Contribute
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 QW-Group/ezquake-source

When evaluating whether to contribute to QW-Group/ezquake-source, 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 QW-Group/ezquake-source acknowledge new external contributions in approximately 3 days+. Out of all submitted pull requests from non-core authors in the last 180-day window, 50.0% were successfully merged into the primary branch.

Frequently Asked Questions - Contributing to QW-Group/ezquake-source

01

Is QW-Group/ezquake-source welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

QW-Group/ezquake-source has a recorded first-timer success rate of 50.0%. 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 ~3 days+. Keeping PRs scoped to single concerns and ensuring CI checks succeed will optimize review turnaround.

03

What does the 52.6 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 52.6 places QW-Group/ezquake-source in the Solid tier.

04

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for QW-Group/ezquake-source?

The external pull request merge rate is 50.0%. 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 QW-Group/ezquake-source?

Yes, QW-Group/ezquake-source currently has 1 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 QW-Group/ezquake-source 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.