ludo-technologies/pyscn - Open Source PR Review Scorecard

Code quality analysis for Python in the age of AI coding.

C-Rank Grade: A (Welcoming) - 57/100

External PR Merge Rate: 87%

Response Time: -

First Timer Success: 88%

Frequently Asked Questions

Is ludo-technologies/pyscn welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

ludo-technologies/pyscn has a recorded first-timer success rate of 87.5%. 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 ludo-technologies/pyscn 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 57.3 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 57.3 places ludo-technologies/pyscn in the A tier.

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for ludo-technologies/pyscn?

The external contributor pull request merge rate for ludo-technologies/pyscn is 86.9%, based on public PR activity from non-core contributors.

Are there Good First Issues available in ludo-technologies/pyscn?

ludo-technologies/pyscn does not currently have active "good first issue" tags indexed, but accepts external contributions through standard GitHub issue tracking.

ludo-technologies
ludo-technologies/pyscnA•Welcoming1.1k
GitHub
Back to Explorer
ludo-technologies

ludo-technologies/pyscn

1,068
Active (30d)A•Welcoming(57/100)Go

Code quality analysis for Python in the age of AI coding.

GitHub
Compare••
Jump to:

AI Maintainer Review Guidelines

Review Persona

Welcoming Community Builder

Warmth Score
9.5/10
Patience Score
9.4/10
Nitpick Rate
30%

Highly welcoming maintainers in ludo-technologies/pyscn. 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
-
No reviewer activity recorded

Average Response Latency

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

Merge Efficiency
86.9%
High acceptance rate for external PRs

External Acceptance Rate

Percentage of community pull requests successfully merged into main.

First-Timer Success
87.5%
Strong first-timer PR acceptance rate

First PR Conversion

Rate at which developers submitting their first repository PR succeed.

Active Maintainers
7 core
Highly collaborative maintainer core
Diagnostic Health HUD
86.9%
Merge Gauge
87.5%
1st-Timer
Community Vibe61/100

Embed C-Rank Badge

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

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

Active Good First Issues (4)

View on GitHub

Track: tuning · detector: clone Summary Groups created by appendUncoveredPairGroups (#525) are never checked by the covered-group dedup (#518). So the nested-window duplicates that #518 removed come back as separate groups and pairs, and they inflate duplicated_fragments and code_duplication_percentage. Evidence pyscn v1.32.3 (b3a74d7), lordmauve/wasabi2d@78116b4. effects/posterize.py:21-31 (method draw) and posterize.py:23-31 (the with block inside it) are separate fragments. redundant group sim covered by {base_matrix.py:32-41, posterize.py:23-31} 0.768 {base_matrix 32-41, outline 24-33, posterize 21-31} 0.84 {outline.py:24-33, posterize.py:23-31} 0.676 same {punch.py:25-33, posterize.py:23-31} 0.683 {posterize 21-31, punch 25-33} 0.782 (itself appended) That makes 3 of 12 groups and 3 of 19 pairs repeats. duplicated_fragments is 20 instead of 19, so dup % is 4.535 instead of 4.308. Minimal repro Copy wasabi2d/effects/{base_matrix,outline,posterize,punch}.py into an em

📅 Opened Oct 4, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute

Problem extractMethodCalls (internal/analyzer/lcom.go) only sees explicit self.name(...) calls. Methods that reach other methods through Python protocols get no edge: list(self) / for k in self -> __iter__, self[k] -> __getitem__/__setitem__, self == other -> __eq__. Mapping and sequence classes split into many single-method components. Repro class OrderedDictLike: def __init__(self): self.__map = {} def __setitem__(self, key, value): self.__map[key] = value def __iter__(self): return iter(self.__map) def __getitem__(self, key): return self.__map[key] def keys(self): return list(self) def values(self): return [self[key] for key in self] def __eq__(self, other): return dict(self) == dict(other) def __ne__(self, other): return not self == other def update(self, other): for key in other: self[key] = other[key] pyscn analyze --json --no-open --select lcom . Expect

📅 Opened Sep 22, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute

Problem LCOM4 joins methods through shared self.x access or self.method() calls. A method that reads no instance variable and calls no sibling method always becomes its own component. This is normal for operator dunders that pass self to a free function (__add__ -> chain(self, other)), for closure-based wrappers (__call__/__repr__/__str__ using captured locals), and for stdlib overrides like tzinfo.utcoffset/dst/tzname. The class gets a high LCOM4 with nothing to split. Repro def make_operator(name, module): class OperatorImplementation: def __call__(self, *args): return f"{module}.{name}(...)" def __repr__(self): return f"{module}.{name}" def __str__(self): return f"{name}" return OperatorImplementation() pyscn analyze --json --no-open --select lcom . Expected LCOM4 1, or stateless methods left out of the graph the same way abstract methods are (#559). Actual {"name":"OperatorImplementation","lcom4":3,"total_method

📅 Opened Sep 22, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute

Summary The current Type-2 clone detection uses Jaccard coefficient, which treats all features equally weighted. By switching to TF-IDF + Cosine Similarity, we can reduce the weight of frequently occurring tokens and potentially reduce false positives. Current Issues Problems with Jaccard Coefficient All features are treated equally Frequently occurring tokens like @dataclass, def __init__, return carry high weight Computed with the same weight as unique business logic Boilerplate reduction not applied to Type-2 IsBoilerplateLabel() in framework_patterns.go is only used for Type-3 (APTED) cost calculation Not applied in Type-2 Jaccard calculation Causes of false positives Classes using framework patterns (dataclass, Pydantic, etc.) are easily judged as similar Example: Domain-specific logic like ConsumptionTaxPolicy may be falsely detected as a clone of another class with the same decorators Proposal: TF-IDF + Cosine Similarity Benefits of TF-IDF Token Current (Jaccard

📅 Opened Feb 1, 2026💬 2 comments
Quality: 70/100Contribute
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 ludo-technologies/pyscn

When evaluating whether to contribute to ludo-technologies/pyscn, 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 ludo-technologies/pyscn acknowledge new external contributions in approximately -. Out of all submitted pull requests from non-core authors in the last 180-day window, 86.9% were successfully merged into the primary branch.

Frequently Asked Questions - Contributing to ludo-technologies/pyscn

01

Is ludo-technologies/pyscn welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

ludo-technologies/pyscn has a recorded first-timer success rate of 87.5%. 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 57.3 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 57.3 places ludo-technologies/pyscn in the Welcoming tier.

04

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for ludo-technologies/pyscn?

The external pull request merge rate is 86.9%. 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 ludo-technologies/pyscn?

ludo-technologies/pyscn does not have open beginner labels indexed currently, but external PRs for bugs and documentation improvements are evaluated via normal issue triage.

GetMerged C-Rank™ Indexing Standard

All metrics displayed for ludo-technologies/pyscn 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.