mattogodoy/nametag - Open Source PR Review Scorecard

A simple, yet effective Personal Relationship Manager

C-Rank Grade: S (Elite) - 74/100

External PR Merge Rate: 92%

Response Time: 5h

First Timer Success: 100%

Frequently Asked Questions

Is mattogodoy/nametag welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

mattogodoy/nametag 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 mattogodoy/nametag respond to incoming external pull requests in approximately 5.0 hours on average. Keeping PRs focused on single tasks and ensuring tests pass helps maintainers review faster.

What does the 74.3 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 74.3 places mattogodoy/nametag in the S tier.

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for mattogodoy/nametag?

The external contributor pull request merge rate for mattogodoy/nametag is 92.5%, based on public PR activity from non-core contributors.

Are there Good First Issues available in mattogodoy/nametag?

mattogodoy/nametag currently has 2 active issue(s) tagged with beginner-friendly labels like "good first issue", "beginner", or "up-for-grabs".

mattogodoy
mattogodoy/nametagS•Elite1.0k
GitHub
Back to Explorer
mattogodoy

mattogodoy/nametag

1,039
InactiveS•Elite(74/100)TypeScript

A simple, yet effective Personal Relationship Manager

GitHub
Compare••
Jump to:

AI Maintainer Review Guidelines

Review Persona

Strict Architecture Gatekeeper

Warmth Score
7.3/10
Patience Score
7.8/10
Nitpick Rate
50%

Strict review standards in mattogodoy/nametag. 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
5 hours
Standard maintainer review cycle

Average Response Latency

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

Merge Efficiency
92.5%
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
5 core
Small core review team
Diagnostic Health HUD
92.5%
Merge Gauge
100.0%
1st-Timer
Community Vibe93/100

Embed C-Rank Badge

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

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

Active Good First Issues (2)

View on GitHub

createNtfyEndpointSchema in lib/validations.ts is now a @deprecated alias kept solely so that existing tests resolve. The creation route validates with createEndpointSchema, the discriminated union that also accepts webhooks. The two are structurally equivalent today, because the union contains exactly that object, so nothing is actually untested. But tests/lib/validations.test.ts exercises a schema that no production code path uses, which is the kind of divergence that quietly stops meaning anything the moment the union changes. Point those tests at createEndpointSchema and delete the alias. While there, note that createEndpointSchema itself has no direct unit tests in that file, so the union's discriminant behaviour is only covered indirectly through the route tests. Found during review of #449.

📅 Opened Aug 28, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute

Two areas of the UI have translations that were written without a native speaker and would benefit from review. Notification destinations (added in #435) 22 new keys under settings.notifications.* in all ten locale files. Lower confidence on ru-RU, ja-JP and zh-CN. The important pair is endpointTestBlocked and endpointTestDns. These deliberately convey different things: endpointTestBlocked is permanent: the URL was refused and the user must change it. endpointTestDns is transient: the hostname did not resolve, the URL may be fine, try again. A translation that renders both as a generic "could not connect" silently undoes that distinction for those users, and no automated check can detect it: the locale parity test only compares key trees, not meaning. A self-hoster whose resolver hiccupped would be told to change a URL that was correct. Specific wording to look at: ru-RU: "не удалось определить" for DNS resolution is weaker than the conventional "разрешит

📅 Opened Aug 27, 2026💬 1 comment
Quality: 90/100Contribute
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 mattogodoy/nametag

When evaluating whether to contribute to mattogodoy/nametag, 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 mattogodoy/nametag acknowledge new external contributions in approximately 5 hours. Out of all submitted pull requests from non-core authors in the last 180-day window, 92.5% were successfully merged into the primary branch.

Frequently Asked Questions - Contributing to mattogodoy/nametag

01

Is mattogodoy/nametag welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

mattogodoy/nametag 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 ~5 hours. Keeping PRs scoped to single concerns and ensuring CI checks succeed will optimize review turnaround.

03

What does the 74.3 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 74.3 places mattogodoy/nametag in the Elite tier.

04

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for mattogodoy/nametag?

The external pull request merge rate is 92.5%. 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 mattogodoy/nametag?

Yes, mattogodoy/nametag currently has 2 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 mattogodoy/nametag 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.