jo-duchan/tapflow - Open Source PR Review Scorecard

Self-hosted iOS & Android simulator streaming for the whole team

C-Rank Grade: S (Elite) - 75/100

External PR Merge Rate: 92%

Response Time: 4d

First Timer Success: 100%

Frequently Asked Questions

Is jo-duchan/tapflow welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

jo-duchan/tapflow 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 jo-duchan/tapflow respond to incoming external pull requests in approximately 98.2 hours on average. Keeping PRs focused on single tasks and ensuring tests pass helps maintainers review faster.

What does the 75.4 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 75.4 places jo-duchan/tapflow in the S tier.

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for jo-duchan/tapflow?

The external contributor pull request merge rate for jo-duchan/tapflow is 91.8%, based on public PR activity from non-core contributors.

Are there Good First Issues available in jo-duchan/tapflow?

jo-duchan/tapflow currently has 8 active issue(s) tagged with beginner-friendly labels like "good first issue", "beginner", or "up-for-grabs".

jo-duchan
jo-duchan/tapflowS•Elite850
GitHub
Back to Explorer
jo-duchan

jo-duchan/tapflow

850
Active (30d)S•Elite(75/100)TypeScript

Self-hosted iOS & Android simulator streaming for the whole team

GitHub
Compare••
Jump to:

AI Maintainer Review Guidelines

Review Persona

Strict Architecture Gatekeeper

Warmth Score
7.4/10
Patience Score
8.0/10
Nitpick Rate
35%

Strict review standards in jo-duchan/tapflow. Ensure PR scope matches issue requirements closely before requesting review.

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
4 days+
Standard maintainer review cycle

Average Response Latency

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

Merge Efficiency
91.8%
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
9 core
Highly collaborative maintainer core
Diagnostic Health HUD
91.8%
Merge Gauge
100.0%
1st-Timer
Community Vibe67/100

Embed C-Rank Badge

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

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

Active Good First Issues (5)

View on GitHub

When no decoder can be picked, tapflow does not stream and there is nothing else it can do — so the message explaining that is the entire product experience for whoever lands there. Three things are wrong with it, all within a few lines of each other. The Android message is hardcoded Korean. AndroidViewer.tsx:588 renders "이 환경에서는 스트리밍을 표시할 수 없습니다. / Chrome/Edge 또는 HTTPS 환경에서 다시 시도해 주세요." to everyone. This is the widest of the three: it reaches every person on that path, not a subset, and an English-speaking self-hoster gets two lines they cannot read at the one moment the product needs to explain itself. iOS shows nothing at all. IOSViewer.tsx:125 is onUnsupported: () => { /* iOS has no separate unsupported UI; the hook warns */ }, and the warning is console.warn in useDecoderStream.ts:73. So the same environment gives an Android tester an explanation in the wrong language and an iOS tester a black rectangle with no ex

📅 Opened Sep 3, 2026💬 2 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute

What happened? On Windows, the full relay suite is not portable: powershell corepack pnpm --filter @tapflowio/relay test Steps to reproduce Use Windows with Node.js and Corepack available. Clone the repository and install dependencies. From the repository root, run: corepack pnpm --filter @tapflowio/relay test Expected behavior The relay test suite should complete successfully on Windows, or explicitly skip only assertions that cannot be meaningful on Windows. ZIP fixtures should not require a system zip executable, and temporary test resources should close cleanly before cleanup. Platform Neither (relay / dashboard / CLI) tapflow version 0.1.0 (source checkout; @tapflowio/relay 0.19.0) Node.js version v24.13.0 macOS version (iOS agent only) No response Mac architecture (the machine running the agent) arm64 (Apple Silicon) Xcode version (iOS agent only) No response Relevant logs Test Files 4 failed | 57 passed | 1 skipped (62) Tests 5 failed | 699 passed | 1 skipped (705

📅 Opened Aug 24, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 60/100Contribute

What Two small UI fixes (#586 follow-up branch) put MacResources.tsx and CommentPanel.tsx through the a11y gate, which surfaced a backlog well beyond the diff. The blocking findings were fixed there — the chart's readings are keyboard-reachable through a slider cursor, the composer's controls are named, attachments announce their filename. These were reported alongside them and are not fixed: MacResources has no unconditional h1. The only one is the selected Mac's name, which renders conditionally, so the no-selection, loading and empty states have an h2 (the chart titles, and the sidebar's "Macs") with no h1 above them. The route needs a stable page heading. The Mac list's state lives only in CSS. Selection is a bg-accent class and online/offline is a coloured dot, so a screen-reader user can reach the region but cannot tell which Mac is selected or which are up. Wants aria-current and a visually-hidden status word. The comment file-validation message is not announced. Pick a file

📅 Opened Aug 18, 2026💬 2 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute

Context #565 added a runtime smoke test to .github/workflows/docker-publish.yml. It boots the built image on both architectures, checks that / serves the dashboard HTML and that /api/v1/auth/status answers, and confirms the JWT secret survives container recreation. That proves the process starts and the HTTP surface works. It does not touch the relay's actual job. RelayServer attaches a WebSocketServer to the same HTTP server (packages/relay/src/RelayServer.ts:249), and every frame between an agent and a browser goes through it. An image whose upgrade path is broken while static files and REST still answer would publish green and be useless to whoever pulls it. Scope Add one step to the smoke, after the existing readiness loop: Open a WebSocket to ws://127.0.0.1:4000/ against the running container and assert the handshake completes (HTTP 101). Assert the relay then closes it with code 1008 (see below). Fail the step, and therefore the merge job, when either does not happen. The ex

📅 Opened Aug 16, 2026💬 7 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute

changelogEntryOwed in scripts/check-changeset.mjs regexes the raw changeset body with no markdown awareness, so a marker quoted inside a ``` fence silently releases a user-facing change from the CHANGELOG demand. It is reachable rather than theoretical: the natural changeset for a follow-up to the gate itself quotes the marker to document it. Every other near-miss fails in the safe direction — different casing, an indented marker in a list or blockquote, trailing whitespace or CRLF, the marker split across two lines all fail to match and ask for an entry that may already have been written. Only the fence, and a marker inside the --- frontmatter (self-limiting, since changeset version would reject the YAML), go the dangerous way. Strip fenced regions before matching, or require the marker in the last non-empty paragraph. Found by the adversarial review on the backfill-and-gate branch.

📅 Opened Aug 14, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 100/100Contribute
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 jo-duchan/tapflow

When evaluating whether to contribute to jo-duchan/tapflow, 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 jo-duchan/tapflow acknowledge new external contributions in approximately 4 days+. Out of all submitted pull requests from non-core authors in the last 180-day window, 91.8% were successfully merged into the primary branch.

Frequently Asked Questions - Contributing to jo-duchan/tapflow

01

Is jo-duchan/tapflow welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

jo-duchan/tapflow 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 ~4 days+. Keeping PRs scoped to single concerns and ensuring CI checks succeed will optimize review turnaround.

03

What does the 75.4 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 75.4 places jo-duchan/tapflow in the Elite tier.

04

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for jo-duchan/tapflow?

The external pull request merge rate is 91.8%. 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 jo-duchan/tapflow?

Yes, jo-duchan/tapflow currently has 8 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 jo-duchan/tapflow 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.