open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation - Open Source PR Review Scorecard

Zero-code OpenTelemetry instrumentation powered by eBPF

C-Rank Grade: S (Elite) - 72/100

External PR Merge Rate: 68%

Response Time: 4h

First Timer Success: 62%

Frequently Asked Questions

Is open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation has a recorded first-timer success rate of 61.9%. 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 open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation respond to incoming external pull requests in approximately 3.6 hours on average. Keeping PRs focused on single tasks and ensuring tests pass helps maintainers review faster.

What does the 71.8 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 71.8 places open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation in the S tier.

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation?

The external contributor pull request merge rate for open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation is 68.4%, based on public PR activity from non-core contributors.

Are there Good First Issues available in open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation?

open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation currently has 12 active issue(s) tagged with beginner-friendly labels like "good first issue", "beginner", or "up-for-grabs".

open-telemetry
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentationS•Elite540
GitHub
Back to Explorer
open-telemetry

open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation

540
Active (30d)S•Elite(72/100)C

Zero-code OpenTelemetry instrumentation powered by eBPF

GitHub
Compare••
Jump to:

AI Maintainer Review Guidelines

Review Persona

Strict Architecture Gatekeeper

Warmth Score
6.4/10
Patience Score
7.4/10
Nitpick Rate
45%

Strict review standards in open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation. Ensure PR scope matches issue requirements closely before requesting review.

What Contributors Actually Say

Discussions in open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation 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

  • •Add or update tests for changed behavior before requesting review
  • •Link the issue and include reproduction context in the PR
  • •Update docs or README when behavior changes

Top PR Friction Pitfalls (Don'ts)

  • •Do not leave requested test coverage unresolved
  • •Do not open context-free PRs
  • •Do not ship user-facing changes without matching docs
Response Velocity
3 hours
Standard maintainer review cycle

Average Response Latency

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

Merge Efficiency
68.4%
Moderate PR acceptance rate

External Acceptance Rate

Percentage of community pull requests successfully merged into main.

First-Timer Success
61.9%
Strong first-timer PR acceptance rate

First PR Conversion

Rate at which developers submitting their first repository PR succeed.

Active Maintainers
40 core
Highly collaborative maintainer core
Diagnostic Health HUD
68.4%
Merge Gauge
61.9%
1st-Timer
Community Vibe73/100

Embed C-Rank Badge

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

GetMerged C-Rank badge for open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation
[![GetMerged C-Rank](https://getmerged.abhishekco.de/api/badge/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation)](https://getmerged.abhishekco.de/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation?utm_source=github&utm_medium=badge)

Active Good First Issues (5)

View on GitHub

What happened ProcessTracer.log (pkg/ebpf/tracer.go) is assigned exactly once, lazily, inside Run(): https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation/blob/v0.12.2/pkg/ebpf/tracer_linux.go#L112 func (pt *ProcessTracer) Run(...) { pt.log = ptlog().With("type", pt.Type) ... Run() is invoked asynchronously and, for a "generic"-type tracer, exactly once — the first time traceAttacher's shared reusableTracer is created for a node (any non-language-instrumented process — shell scripts, coreutils, busybox multi-call binaries, etc. — shares one ProcessTracer). Any code path that calls into pt.log before that Run() goroutine has actually executed its first line dereferences a nil *slog.Logger and panics — the whole process crashes with an unrecovered panic (exit code 2). Two call sites in UnlinkExecutable can hit this: func (pt *ProcessTracer) UnlinkExecutable(info *exec.FileInfo, generation uint64) { ... i, ok := pt.Instrumentables[key] if !ok { pt.log.Warn("U

📅 Opened Aug 31, 2026💬 3 comments
Quality: 50/100Contribute

Component OBI (eBPF instrumentation) What happened? Context: #2431 The verifier fails when CAP_PERFMON is missing and the full verifier log is dumped to stdout What did you expect to happen? A clear error message signaling the missing capability should be printed out Steps to reproduce / OBI configuration Relevant logs Additional context No response Version No response Kernel version No response OS / Distribution No response Deployment None

📅 Opened Jun 26, 2026💬 5 comments
Quality: 40/100Contribute

There are known offsets of embedded Go struct types or offsets of the Go slice length and size, which are referenced just as 8 or 16 in the code. We should declare these are known constants and use them through out the Go BPF code, instead of 8. 8 is confusing because people reading the code may think it's an offset we should be pulling from the offsets map.

📅 Opened May 4, 2026💬 5 comments
Quality: 30/100Contribute

Functions like detectGenericProtocol and detectHeuristicProtocol are synchronously invoked between ringbuf reads (invoked deep inside rbf.parse ) and might take some CPU time doing a check after another. It might be contributing to the RingBufForwarder not being able to read all the messages under some high-load scenarios. I'd suggest creating a user-configurable option that would let the user defining the actual protocols we should check and don't look for the ones that are not in that map. By default, we would check for all the protocols but users noticing ringbuffer drops could decide whether not to check protocols they know they aren't going to instrument in their system. For minimal impact, we could use maps.Bits implementation.

📅 Opened Apr 30, 2026💬 1 comment
Quality: 30/100Contribute

Analogous to Net O11y packet stats: https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation/blob/main/bpf/netolly/flows.c#L173C1-L174C1 We could add a set of two metrics: total ringbuffer attempts and failed ringbuf writes. This would allow monitoring whether OBI ringbuf reader is not able to read/parse at the pace spans are produced.

📅 Opened Apr 30, 2026💬 6 comments
Quality: 15/100Contribute
Looking for more C beginner tasks?Explore C 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 open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation

When evaluating whether to contribute to open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation, 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 open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation acknowledge new external contributions in approximately 3 hours. Out of all submitted pull requests from non-core authors in the last 180-day window, 68.4% were successfully merged into the primary branch.

Frequently Asked Questions - Contributing to open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation

01

Is open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation has a recorded first-timer success rate of 61.9%. 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 ~3 hours. Keeping PRs scoped to single concerns and ensuring CI checks succeed will optimize review turnaround.

03

What does the 71.8 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 71.8 places open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation in the Elite tier.

04

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation?

The external pull request merge rate is 68.4%. 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 open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation?

Yes, open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation currently has 12 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 open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation 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.