dsx-ai-factory/topograph - Open Source PR Review Scorecard

A toolkit for discovering cluster network topology.

C-Rank Grade: B (Solid) - 50/100

External PR Merge Rate: 50%

Response Time: <1h

First Timer Success: -

Frequently Asked Questions

Is dsx-ai-factory/topograph welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

dsx-ai-factory/topograph has a recorded first-timer success rate of 0.0%. 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 dsx-ai-factory/topograph respond to incoming external pull requests in approximately 1.0 hours on average. Keeping PRs focused on single tasks and ensuring tests pass helps maintainers review faster.

What does the 49.7 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 49.7 places dsx-ai-factory/topograph in the B tier.

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for dsx-ai-factory/topograph?

The external contributor pull request merge rate for dsx-ai-factory/topograph is 50.0%, based on public PR activity from non-core contributors.

Are there Good First Issues available in dsx-ai-factory/topograph?

dsx-ai-factory/topograph currently has 5 active issue(s) tagged with beginner-friendly labels like "good first issue", "beginner", or "up-for-grabs".

dsx-ai-factory
dsx-ai-factory/topographB•Solid180
GitHub
Back to Explorer
dsx-ai-factory

dsx-ai-factory/topograph

180
Active (30d)B•Solid(50/100)Low Sample (<20 PRs)Go

A toolkit for discovering cluster network topology.

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 dsx-ai-factory/topograph. Reviews community pull requests with focus on project quality.

What Contributors Actually Say

Discussions in dsx-ai-factory/topograph 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
<1 hour
⚡ Fast reviewer response

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
0.0%
No first-timer merges recorded in window

First PR Conversion

Rate at which developers submitting their first repository PR succeed.

Active Maintainers
1 core
Single maintainer review bottleneck
Diagnostic Health HUD
50.0%
Merge Gauge
0.0%
1st-Timer
Community Vibe49/100

Embed C-Rank Badge

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

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

Active Good First Issues (5)

View on GitHub

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe. Starting a separate thread from #265 (comment) Our project runs on Kubernetes and uses NVIDIA Topograph. Each compute node may have separate IB interfaces for compute and storage, for example 4 compute IB interfaces and 1 storage IB interface. Example: Compute +-------- spine1 --------+ | | +---+----+ +----+---+ | switch1| | switch2| +---+----+ +----+---+ | | +-----+-----+ +-----+-----+ | | | | | | A B C D E F Storage +-----------------+ | switch-storage1 | +--------+--------+ | +--------------+-------------------+ | |

📅 Opened Aug 28, 2026💬 5 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute

Description Many cloud providers expose physical topology information in their managed Kubernetes offerings through node labels. Kubernetes-native schedulers can consume these labels directly, but Slurm-on-Kubernetes systems such as Slinky require a generated topology.conf stored in a ConfigMap and cannot consume Kubernetes node labels directly. Topograph should support this use case with a dedicated provider that discovers topology from configurable Kubernetes node labels. This provider is intended to eventually supersede the existing dra provider. Proposed behavior Accept an ordered list of topology label keys, from the tier closest to the node to the furthest tier. Read the configured labels from Kubernetes Nodes and translate them into Topograph’s canonical topology graph. Treat missing or invalid label values according to a clearly defined validation policy. Integrate with the existing Node Observer so topology is regenerated when: a Node is added or deleted; a relevant topolo

📅 Opened Aug 19, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute

Summary Add an optional, provider-independent Kubernetes node-metadata plugin that maps each discovered rail NIC to its closest physical GPU or GPUs. The SR-IOV DRA driver can consume this metadata and expose it as NIC device attributes. The feature does not depend on provider.name, change topology.Graph, or create ResourceSlice objects. Design Responsibilities Component Responsibility Node Data Broker Discover local rail and GPU/NIC topology, compute the mapping, and publish its Node record Node Observer Reconcile stale release-owned records and clean them up when the plugin is disabled Topology provider Continue producing canonical topology independently SR-IOV DRA driver Translate the mapping into attributes on the NIC devices it owns Plugin discovery and publication remain independent of provider annotation collection. Discovery and selection The initial host-lldp rail source: Runs lldpctl -f json through the host lldpd socket. Selects neighbor-bearing interfaces w

📅 Opened Aug 2, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute

This issue is intended to discuss and align Topograph's direction - and highlight areas where contributions are especially desired! Direction Topograph's strategic positioning is to be the standard topology-discovery layer for AI cluster scheduling — a unified substrate that abstracts over diverse infrastructure sources (cloud APIs, InfiniBand fabric, NVIDIA-managed NVLink/Ethernet) and translates topology into the formats each scheduler can consume (Slurm topology.conf, Kubernetes node labels, Slinky ConfigMaps). The broader the provider and engine coverage, the more useful the standardized topology layer becomes for downstream schedulers (KAI Scheduler, Kueue, Grove, native pod affinity), operational tooling (NVSentinel), and the ecosystem of observability / placement tools that depend on accurate, real-time topology data. We actively welcome community contribution. The provider interface is well-defined, the engine boundary is stable, and the project is designed to accept new inte

📅 Opened Apr 17, 2026💬 4 comments
Quality: 30/100Contribute

Problem docs/engines/k8s.md currently ends with: Validation and Testing TBD Topograph has Go unit tests and integration fixtures (tests/integration/payloads/*.json), but no end-to-end cluster-level suite that asserts "given a deployed chart, do the right labels and annotations actually land on nodes?" This gap is felt most acutely when changing the Helm chart, Node Observer, or engine output — there's no quick way to verify the full deployment-to-labels flow without manual cluster testing. Proposed approach Adopt Chainsaw (Kyverno team, Apache 2.0) — the declarative Kubernetes E2E test framework used widely across Kubernetes OSS. Tests are YAML that run apply → wait → assert → cleanup against a real cluster (kind in CI). Assertions use JMESPath-style expressions to verify cluster state, which fits Topograph's output model precisely: node labels, annotations, and ConfigMaps are exactly what Chainsaw is designed to assert. Why Chainsaw specifically: Topograph's Kubernetes en

📅 Opened Apr 17, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 30/100Contribute
Looking for more Go beginner tasks?Explore Go 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 dsx-ai-factory/topograph

When evaluating whether to contribute to dsx-ai-factory/topograph, 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 dsx-ai-factory/topograph acknowledge new external contributions in approximately <1 hour. 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 dsx-ai-factory/topograph

01

Is dsx-ai-factory/topograph welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

dsx-ai-factory/topograph has a recorded first-timer success rate of 0.0%. 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 ~<1 hour. Keeping PRs scoped to single concerns and ensuring CI checks succeed will optimize review turnaround.

03

What does the 49.7 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 49.7 places dsx-ai-factory/topograph in the Solid tier.

04

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for dsx-ai-factory/topograph?

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 dsx-ai-factory/topograph?

Yes, dsx-ai-factory/topograph currently has 5 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 dsx-ai-factory/topograph 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.