element-hq/element-call - Open Source PR Review Scorecard

Group calls powered by Matrix

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

External PR Merge Rate: 73%

Response Time: -

First Timer Success: 57%

Frequently Asked Questions

Is element-hq/element-call welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

element-hq/element-call has a recorded first-timer success rate of 57.1%. 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 element-hq/element-call respond to incoming external pull requests in approximately 0.0 hours on average. Keeping PRs focused on single tasks and ensuring tests pass helps maintainers review faster.

What does the 67.4 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 67.4 places element-hq/element-call in the A tier.

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for element-hq/element-call?

The external contributor pull request merge rate for element-hq/element-call is 72.9%, based on public PR activity from non-core contributors.

Are there Good First Issues available in element-hq/element-call?

element-hq/element-call currently has 5 active issue(s) tagged with beginner-friendly labels like "good first issue", "beginner", or "up-for-grabs".

element-hq
element-hq/element-callA•Welcoming1.0k
GitHub
Back to Explorer
element-hq

element-hq/element-call

1,010
Active (30d)A•Welcoming(67/100)TypeScript

Group calls powered by Matrix

GitHub
Compare••
Jump to:

AI Maintainer Review Guidelines

Review Persona

Strict Quality Architect

Warmth Score
7.1/10
Patience Score
7.6/10
Nitpick Rate
36%

Balanced & professional review environment in element-hq/element-call. Maintains strict focus on technical quality and test standards.

Top PR Submission Do's

  • •Add unit tests with >80% coverage for modified code paths
  • •Run repository linter and code formatters locally before pushing
  • •Link relevant GitHub issue ID in PR description pre-flight checklist

Top PR Friction Pitfalls (Don'ts)

  • •Do not submit unlinked PRs without referencing an existing issue
  • •Do not mix refactoring and feature logic into a single commit
  • •Do not ping maintainers repeatedly within 24 hours of opening
Response Velocity
-
No reviewer activity recorded

Average Response Latency

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

Merge Efficiency
72.9%
Moderate PR acceptance rate

External Acceptance Rate

Percentage of community pull requests successfully merged into main.

First-Timer Success
57.1%
Strong first-timer PR acceptance rate

First PR Conversion

Rate at which developers submitting their first repository PR succeed.

Active Maintainers
28 core
Highly collaborative maintainer core
Diagnostic Health HUD
72.9%
Merge Gauge
57.1%
1st-Timer
Community Vibe46/100

Embed C-Rank Badge

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

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

Active Good First Issues (5)

View on GitHub

Steps to reproduce Running element call in standalone mode hooked up to Continuwuity Start a new room as an anonymous user Copy the invite link and open in a new browser Outcome What did you expect? Joining the room works successfully What happened instead? An error occurs: and the logs show This is due to a conditional in element call that is supposed to assume the room's join_rule === public if it's not present, however the check is implemented incorrectly in certain cases: In this room summary response, the join_rule is not present. According to the spec for room summaries, join_rule missing should be interpreted as public. When Ruma (and by extension, Continuwuity) renders the json response for a room summary, it excludes the value if it's public - which complies with the spec. In order to fix this, I can simply: diff --git a/src/room/useLoadGroupCall.ts b/src/room/useLoadGroupCall.ts index 2cd0d40b..8a7617d8 100644 --- a/src/room/useLoadGroupCall.ts +++ b/src/room/useLoadGrou

📅 Opened Aug 7, 2026💬 2 comments
Quality: 40/100Contribute

Summary The default branch already hardened .github/workflows/blocked.yaml, .github/workflows/changelog-label.yml against the issue(s) below, but 4 release branches still carry it. This proposes the same, minimal, scanner-verified fix for each. What's flagged (by zizmor) unpinned-uses — actions referenced by mutable tag/branch instead of a pinned commit SHA Already resolved on the default branch in: cc8ab0a cf0cb2e Affected release branches (4) release-v0.9.0 (still present as of HEAD 4644fc89) release-v0.11.1 (still present as of HEAD b5f526f9) release-v0.11.0 (still present as of HEAD 6e9b837f) release-v0.8.0 (still present as of HEAD a2df8fae) Suggested per-branch patches Each diff below was checked locally with zizmor and actionlint: the flagged finding(s) are cleared on the affected construct and no new lint or security findings are introduced. (Whitespace is normalized; only security-relevant lines change.) release-v0.9.0 — unpinned-uses File .github/workflows/blocked.

📅 Opened Jun 29, 2026💬 2 comments
Quality: 40/100Contribute

Your use case What would you like to do? Review + update the reverse proxy snippets of the self hosting doc. Why would you like to do it? The snippets include the /sfu/get endpoint but not the /get_token endpoint. I believe /sfu/get is being depreciated in favor of /get_token. The snippets could have minor changes made to improve clarity. The Caddy snippet at least would have clearer context if it included the opening/closing lines of the block for the domain, and I don't believe adding that and /get_token would add excess clutter or make it a denser read for people reading through. How would you like to achieve it? I'm happy to make a PR for the Caddy changes as that's what I use (It'd be small enough I would have just done that instead of the issue but contributing.md says do the issue so why not), but ideally people familiar with and well versed in using nginx and haproxy would do a pass on those snippets to make sure they're clear and up-to-date as well. Have you considered any a

📅 Opened Jun 11, 2026💬 1 comment
Quality: 45/100Contribute

Potential solutions: The WidgetApi instance should be created in the matrix-js-sdk (maybe) Reexport all of the widget api through the matrix-js-sdk so EC does not depend on the matrix-widget-api directly use a peerDependencies depency to get warnings if versions dont match.

📅 Opened Jun 2, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 55/100Contribute

Your use case What would you like to do? Remind everyone of the passing time. Why would you like to do it? For professional meetings timekeeping is very important. How would you like to achieve it? Add another reaction with sound that is like an alarm clock, timer, etc. Have you considered any alternatives? Unfortunately, the ideal solution of everyone being disciplined is not always feasible. Additional context No response

📅 Opened Mar 24, 2026💬 3 comments
Quality: 45/100Contribute
Looking for more TypeScript beginner tasks?Explore TypeScript 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 element-hq/element-call

When evaluating whether to contribute to element-hq/element-call, 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 element-hq/element-call acknowledge new external contributions in approximately -. Out of all submitted pull requests from non-core authors in the last 180-day window, 72.9% were successfully merged into the primary branch.

Frequently Asked Questions - Contributing to element-hq/element-call

01

Is element-hq/element-call welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

element-hq/element-call has a recorded first-timer success rate of 57.1%. 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 ~-. Keeping PRs scoped to single concerns and ensuring CI checks succeed will optimize review turnaround.

03

What does the 67.4 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 67.4 places element-hq/element-call in the Welcoming tier.

04

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for element-hq/element-call?

The external pull request merge rate is 72.9%. 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 element-hq/element-call?

Yes, element-hq/element-call 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 element-hq/element-call 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.