git-pkgs/forge - Open Source PR Review Scorecard

Go library and CLI for working with git forges. Supports GitHub, GitLab, Gitea/Forgejo, and Bitbucket Cloud through a single interface.

C-Rank Grade: S (Elite) - 79/100

External PR Merge Rate: 98%

Response Time: 1d

First Timer Success: 100%

Frequently Asked Questions

Is git-pkgs/forge welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

git-pkgs/forge has a recorded first-timer success rate of 100.0%. Repositories ranked S 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 git-pkgs/forge respond to incoming external pull requests in approximately 24.5 hours on average. Keeping PRs focused on single tasks and ensuring tests pass helps maintainers review faster.

What does the 78.8 C-Rank™ score (S 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 78.8 places git-pkgs/forge in the S tier.

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for git-pkgs/forge?

The external contributor pull request merge rate for git-pkgs/forge is 97.8%, based on public PR activity from non-core contributors.

Are there Good First Issues available in git-pkgs/forge?

git-pkgs/forge currently has 10 active issue(s) tagged with beginner-friendly labels like "good first issue", "beginner", or "up-for-grabs".

git-pkgs
git-pkgs/forgeSElite211
GitHub
Back to Explorer
git-pkgs

git-pkgs/forge

211
SElite(79/100)Go

Go library and CLI for working with git forges. Supports GitHub, GitLab, Gitea/Forgejo, and Bitbucket Cloud through a single interface.

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 git-pkgs/forge. Reviews community pull requests with focus on project quality.

What Contributors Actually Say

Discussions in git-pkgs/forge 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 days+
Standard maintainer review cycle

Average Response Latency

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

Merge Efficiency
97.8%
High acceptance rate for external PRs

External Acceptance Rate

Percentage of community pull requests successfully merged into main.

First-Timer Success
100.0%
Strong first-timer PR acceptance rate

First PR Conversion

Rate at which developers submitting their first repository PR succeed.

Active Maintainers
3 core
Small core review team
Diagnostic Health HUD
97.8%
Merge Gauge
100.0%
1st-Timer
Community Vibe81/100

Embed C-Rank Badge

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

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

Active Good First Issues (5)

View on GitHub

The forge APIs all support webhooks for real-time event delivery, but the library has no webhook support. Two possible scopes: Webhook management: Create/list/delete webhooks via the API (GitHub, GitLab, Gitea/Forgejo all have endpoints for this) Event parsing: Parse incoming webhook payloads into normalized event types, similar to how the library normalizes API responses across forges Event parsing would be particularly useful since each forge has its own webhook payload format and event names. A unified event type system would let consumers handle webhook events without forge-specific code. This could live alongside the existing polling-based NotificationService as an alternative real-time delivery mechanism.

📅 Opened Mar 29, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 30/100Contribute

The forge APIs support managing notification subscriptions (watch/unwatch repos, subscribe/unsubscribe/ignore threads) but the library doesn't expose this. GitHub: PUT /repos/{owner}/{repo}/subscription (watch repo), PUT /notifications/threads/{id}/subscription (subscribe/ignore thread) GitLab: subscription endpoints for projects and issues/MRs Gitea/Forgejo: PUT /repos/{owner}/{repo}/subscription (watch repo) This would allow consumers to programmatically mute/unmute notification threads and manage repo watch settings, syncing these preferences back to the forge rather than only tracking them locally.

📅 Opened Mar 29, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 30/100Contribute

The Notification struct doesn't include the subject's ID or number (e.g. issue number, PR number), even though the underlying forge APIs provide this information. GitHub: notification.Subject.URL contains /repos/owner/repo/issues/123 GitLab: todo.Target.IID is the issue/MR number directly Gitea/Forgejo: notification.Subject.HTMLURL contains the issue/PR number in the URL path Currently the conversion functions in github/notifications.go, gitlab/notifications.go, and gitea/notifications.go read the subject title and type but discard the subject URL and ID. Adding a SubjectID (or SubjectNumber) and SubjectURL field to the Notification struct would let consumers link notifications to their underlying issues/PRs without making additional API calls. The URL field is also inconsistent across forges: GitHub sets it to the repository HTML URL, while GitLab and Gitea set it to the subject URL. Having separate URL (subject web URL) and Repo fields would make this unambiguous.

📅 Opened Mar 29, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 30/100Contribute

The forge APIs all support fetching the authenticated user's profile but the library doesn't expose this. GitHub: GET /user GitLab: GET /api/v4/user Gitea/Forgejo: GET /api/v1/user A GetAuthenticatedUser() method on the Forge interface (or a new UserService) would allow consumers to get the current user's username, avatar URL, and email after authenticating. This is needed for applications that use OAuth to authenticate users via forges and need to display user profile information.

📅 Opened Mar 29, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 30/100Contribute

Record real API responses from forges and replay them in tests. This avoids hand-written mocks while keeping tests deterministic and fast. Record mode hits the real API and saves responses to fixture files. Replay mode serves those fixtures without network access. New tests or updated APIs just need a re-record.

📅 Opened Mar 11, 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 git-pkgs/forge

When evaluating whether to contribute to git-pkgs/forge, 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 git-pkgs/forge acknowledge new external contributions in approximately 1 days+. Out of all submitted pull requests from non-core authors in the last 180-day window, 97.8% were successfully merged into the primary branch.

Frequently Asked Questions - Contributing to git-pkgs/forge

01

Is git-pkgs/forge welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

git-pkgs/forge has a recorded first-timer success rate of 100.0%. Repositories ranked Elite 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 days+. Keeping PRs scoped to single concerns and ensuring CI checks succeed will optimize review turnaround.

03

What does the 78.8 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 78.8 places git-pkgs/forge in the Elite tier.

04

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for git-pkgs/forge?

The external pull request merge rate is 97.8%. 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 git-pkgs/forge?

Yes, git-pkgs/forge currently has 10 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 git-pkgs/forge 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.