Soju06/codex-lb - Open Source PR Review Scorecard

Codex/ChatGPT multiple account load balancer & proxy with usage tracking, dashboard, and OpenCode-compatible endpoints

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

External PR Merge Rate: 64%

Response Time: 16h

First Timer Success: 52%

Frequently Asked Questions

Is Soju06/codex-lb welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

Soju06/codex-lb has a recorded first-timer success rate of 52.2%. 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 Soju06/codex-lb respond to incoming external pull requests in approximately 16.0 hours on average. Keeping PRs focused on single tasks and ensuring tests pass helps maintainers review faster.

What does the 66.7 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 66.7 places Soju06/codex-lb in the A tier.

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for Soju06/codex-lb?

The external contributor pull request merge rate for Soju06/codex-lb is 64.4%, based on public PR activity from non-core contributors.

Are there Good First Issues available in Soju06/codex-lb?

Soju06/codex-lb currently has 12 active issue(s) tagged with beginner-friendly labels like "good first issue", "beginner", or "up-for-grabs".

Soju06
Soju06/codex-lbA•Welcoming3.3k
GitHub
Back to Explorer
Soju06

Soju06/codex-lb

3,298
Active (30d)A•Welcoming(67/100)Python

Codex/ChatGPT multiple account load balancer & proxy with usage tracking, dashboard, and OpenCode-compatible endpoints

GitHub
Compare••
Jump to:

AI Maintainer Review Guidelines

Review Persona

Empathetic Technical Mentor

Warmth Score
8.0/10
Patience Score
8.4/10
Nitpick Rate
25%

Highly welcoming maintainers in Soju06/codex-lb. 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
16 hours
Standard maintainer review cycle

Average Response Latency

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

Merge Efficiency
64.4%
Moderate PR acceptance rate

External Acceptance Rate

Percentage of community pull requests successfully merged into main.

First-Timer Success
52.2%
Strong first-timer PR acceptance rate

First PR Conversion

Rate at which developers submitting their first repository PR succeed.

Active Maintainers
55 core
Highly collaborative maintainer core
Diagnostic Health HUD
64.4%
Merge Gauge
52.2%
1st-Timer
Community Vibe59/100

Embed C-Rank Badge

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

GetMerged C-Rank badge for Soju06/codex-lb
[![GetMerged C-Rank](https://getmerged.abhishekco.de/api/badge/Soju06/codex-lb)](https://getmerged.abhishekco.de/Soju06/codex-lb?utm_source=github&utm_medium=badge)

Active Good First Issues (5)

View on GitHub

Codex can complete ordinary requests through an OpenAI-compatible Model Source while failing to use subagents. A source can advertise multi_agent_version: "v2" to the client, yet codex-lb still removes the client-supplied collaboration namespace from the upstream Responses request. Source-provided base instructions are also lost in the catalog projection. Environment and scope Observed on a self-built fork based on 1.25.0-beta.6, before fork commit 00164ab0; Docker Compose deployment, Codex CLI 0.156.1. Enabled OpenAI-compatible Model Source with Responses, streaming, and tools support; custom model slug (custom/coder below is an anonymized example). HTTP Responses transport. The successful fix does not require WebSocket support or changing the source credential. Inspected upstream main at 09a140fa: the same catalog projection and tool-filter behavior are still present. The deployed end-to-end verification below was on the fork, not a clean upstream-main deployment. Reproduction Co

📅 Opened Sep 25, 2026💬 1 comment
Quality: 65/100Contribute

Problem The Codex provider examples in the README and client setup guide omit supports_standalone_web_search = true. With my setup, native web search was unavailable through the documented custom provider, even with --search. Codex used browser automation instead. Adding the capability setting restored native web search without changing or restarting codex-lb. Tested environment Codex CLI: 0.157.0 Model: gpt-6-astra, Low reasoning Authentication: ChatGPT login, with a codex-lb API key for the local proxy codex-lb: 1.24.0, Docker image ghcr.io/soju06/codex-lb:latest, revision 84fde5a1ed5e0d5a58ccb3ec4b82938b059bf8c5 Platform: macOS with Docker Desktop Provider base URL: http://127.0.0.1:2455/backend-api/codex Reproduction and comparison Using the documented provider configuration, run: codex --search -c 'model_provider="codex-lb"' \ -m gpt-6-astra -c 'model_reasoning_effort="low"' \ "Search today's top news" In my test, Codex opened Google News through computer use instead of invo

📅 Opened Sep 25, 2026💬 2 comments
Quality: 75/100Contribute

Problem Operators need to alert when the pool has too few active or available accounts, especially when no account can serve requests. codex_lb_accounts_total is declared as a gauge with a status label in app/core/metrics/prometheus.py, but a repository-wide search found no producer that updates it. Consequently, codex_lb_accounts_total{status="active"} cannot currently provide a reliable account count for alerting. No dedicated available-account count gauge was found either. This finding comes from source inspection; a live deployment scrape has not been checked. Evidence / reproduction Run rg -n 'accounts_total' app tests. Observe the gauge declaration, optional-dependency fallback, and export, but no calls populating its labeled values. Once implementing the fix, verify through the actual metrics scrape endpoint with populated and empty account pools. Relevant code: app/core/metrics/prometheus.py: accounts_total declaration (currently uses liveall in multiprocess mode). app/db/mo

📅 Opened Sep 14, 2026💬 1 comment
Quality: 65/100Contribute

Pre-flight checklist I searched existing issues and discussions for similar proposals. This is a concrete proposal, not an open-ended question. Problem / motivation Request logs already persist and return modelSourceId and modelSourceKind for configured model-source traffic (#1129), but the dashboard neither displays nor filters by them. As a result: model-source requests appear as Unassigned in the Account column; two sources serving the same model slug cannot be distinguished; operators cannot isolate source-specific failures, latency, or cost; historical traffic from a deleted source retains its stable source ID, but the dashboard provides no way to find or identify it. Proposed change Add an Upstream multi-select facet to the existing Request Logs view. The facet uses observed request-log data, not merely currently configured sources, with this exhaustive taxonomy: subscription_pool: rows where model_source_id IS NULL. This means the built-in subscription route family, inclu

📅 Opened Aug 21, 2026💬 1 comment
Quality: 65/100Contribute

Pre-flight checklist I searched existing issues and confirmed this is not a duplicate. I am running a supported codex-lb version (see Releases). I can reproduce the problem with the steps below. codex-lb version 1.24.0-beta.2 Deployment method Docker (ghcr.io/Soju06/codex-lb) Client used against codex-lb Codex CLI ChatGPT account plan(s) involved Pro Model(s) involved No response What happened? My telemetry "sample output" contains: "clients": { "codex-cli": 0.18072, "other": 0.81928 }, but I only ever use codex-cli. Is this just bogus sample data, or a bug? What did you expect to happen? codex-cli should be 1. other should be 0. Steps to reproduce 1. start codex-lb 2. View telemetry in settings panel Relevant logs Configuration / environment Additional context No response

📅 Opened Aug 20, 2026💬 2 comments
Quality: 65/100Contribute
Looking for more Python beginner tasks?Explore Python 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 Soju06/codex-lb

When evaluating whether to contribute to Soju06/codex-lb, 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 Soju06/codex-lb acknowledge new external contributions in approximately 16 hours. Out of all submitted pull requests from non-core authors in the last 180-day window, 64.4% were successfully merged into the primary branch.

Frequently Asked Questions - Contributing to Soju06/codex-lb

01

Is Soju06/codex-lb welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

Soju06/codex-lb has a recorded first-timer success rate of 52.2%. 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 ~16 hours. Keeping PRs scoped to single concerns and ensuring CI checks succeed will optimize review turnaround.

03

What does the 66.7 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 66.7 places Soju06/codex-lb in the Welcoming tier.

04

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for Soju06/codex-lb?

The external pull request merge rate is 64.4%. 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 Soju06/codex-lb?

Yes, Soju06/codex-lb currently has 12 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 Soju06/codex-lb 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.