opensandbox-group/OpenSandbox - Open Source PR Review Scorecard

Secure, Fast, and Extensible Sandbox runtime for AI agents.

C-Rank Grade: A (Welcoming) - 66/100

External PR Merge Rate: 66%

Response Time: -

First Timer Success: 59%

Frequently Asked Questions

Is opensandbox-group/OpenSandbox welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

opensandbox-group/OpenSandbox has a recorded first-timer success rate of 59.1%. 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 opensandbox-group/OpenSandbox 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 66.4 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 66.4 places opensandbox-group/OpenSandbox in the A tier.

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for opensandbox-group/OpenSandbox?

The external contributor pull request merge rate for opensandbox-group/OpenSandbox is 66.1%, based on public PR activity from non-core contributors.

Are there Good First Issues available in opensandbox-group/OpenSandbox?

opensandbox-group/OpenSandbox currently has 4 active issue(s) tagged with beginner-friendly labels like "good first issue", "beginner", or "up-for-grabs".

opensandbox-group
opensandbox-group/OpenSandboxA•Welcoming15.8k
GitHub
Back to Explorer
opensandbox-group

opensandbox-group/OpenSandbox

15,813
Active (30d)A•Welcoming(66/100)Python

Secure, Fast, and Extensible Sandbox runtime for AI agents.

GitHub
Compare••
Jump to:

AI Maintainer Review Guidelines

Review Persona

Empathetic Technical Mentor

Warmth Score
7.7/10
Patience Score
8.2/10
Nitpick Rate
30%

Collaborative maintainer environment in opensandbox-group/OpenSandbox. Reviews community pull requests with focus on project quality.

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
66.1%
Moderate PR acceptance rate

External Acceptance Rate

Percentage of community pull requests successfully merged into main.

First-Timer Success
59.1%
Strong first-timer PR acceptance rate

First PR Conversion

Rate at which developers submitting their first repository PR succeed.

Active Maintainers
60 core
Highly collaborative maintainer core
Diagnostic Health HUD
66.1%
Merge Gauge
59.1%
1st-Timer
Community Vibe44/100

Embed C-Rank Badge

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

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

Active Good First Issues (5)

View on GitHub

Why do you need it? DeepSeek Harness (dsh) provides a plugin-based agent harness. We would like to build an OpenSandbox plugin that connects it to isolated execution environments powered by the fast-sandbox runtime. The goal is to combine dsh’s agent capabilities with OpenSandbox’s sandbox lifecycle and execution APIs, using fast-sandbox for fast provisioning and efficient resource usage. This could become the foundation for a self-hosted product similar to Managed Agents: users submit tasks, agents work in dedicated environments, and users can follow progress, retrieve artifacts, and return to existing sessions. We are opening this issue to find contributors interested in designing and building the integration. How could it be? The proposed architecture is: DeepSeek Harness │ OpenSandbox plugin │ OpenSandbox API / SDK │ fast-sandbox runtime │ Isolated execution environments The plugin should consume OpenSandbox’s public APIs. Runtime provisio

📅 Opened Oct 8, 2026💬 4 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute

Summary Kubernetes Pool E2E (ingress-header) intermittently fails in tests/python/tests/test_sandbox_pool_e2e_sync.py::TestSandboxPoolSingleNodeE2ESync::test_concurrent_start_shutdown_stress_single_node: E AssertionError: Timed out waiting for pool remains usable after lifecycle stress FAILED tests/test_sandbox_pool_e2e_sync.py::TestSandboxPoolSingleNodeE2ESync::test_concurrent_start_shutdown_stress_single_node Where it happened Workflow: Kubernetes Mini E2E CI → job Kubernetes Pool E2E (ingress-header) → step Run Kubernetes Pool E2E Run: https://github.com/opensandbox-group/OpenSandbox/actions/runs/36513861015/job/109231868754 Surrounding log noise (may or may not be related) WARNING opensandbox.sync.pool - Pool sandbox cleanup failed: ... error=Kill sandbox ... not found | [KUBERNETES::SANDBOX_NOT_FOUND] WARNING opensandbox.sync.pool - Acquire renew failed after idle connect; ... Cannot acquire from a retired pool run ... state=DRAINING ERROR asyncio - Task was destroyed but

📅 Opened Sep 29, 2026💬 1 comment
Quality: 90/100Contribute

Summary #1497 is still reproducible on main. #1523 attempted a fix but has been closed: it drifted ~535 commits behind main, was in a conflicting state, and its CI never ran beyond auto-label, so the 218 lines of new tests were never executed. This issue tracks a clean rewrite against current main, preserving the parts of #1523 that were reviewed and validated. The defect on main today kubernetes/internal/controller/batchsandbox_status.go:362, inside applySteadyRuntimePhase: if status.Phase == sandboxv1alpha1.BatchSandboxPhaseFailed { return } Once a BatchSandbox reaches Failed, the steady-state path returns unconditionally. If the same Pod (same UID) later recovers to Running and Ready, the phase is never recomputed and the BatchSandbox stays Failed forever. This is exactly the scenario reported in #1497. Prior art from #1523 worth keeping These were reviewed and confirmed correct; they should carry over rather than be redesigned: Recovery keyed on Pod UID, not name. A replacemen

📅 Opened Sep 25, 2026💬 1 comment
Quality: 90/100Contribute

Background The fast-sandbox integration test environment (scripts/fast-sandbox-env/integration-env.sh) currently uses MinIO (minio/minio + minio/mc) as the S3-compatible artifact store for SandboxTemplate builds/publish and snapshot manifests. We want to replace MinIO with RustFS — an S3-compatible, open-source (Apache-2.0) object storage written in Rust — as the artifact store for this environment. Scope Primary target: scripts/fast-sandbox-env/ (the up / status / down stages): Replace the MinIO container with RustFS in integration-env.sh (minio_up stage): container image, run flags, data volume, credentials env health check — the current probe uses MinIO-specific /minio/health/live bucket bootstrap — currently mc alias set + mc mb Replace minio/mc client usages (mc alias, mc mb, mc stat for manifest size checks) with a RustFS-compatible approach (RustFS tooling or generic S3 client) Update env vars / toggles: MINIO_IMAGE, MINIO_PORT, MINIO_CONSOLE_PORT, MINIO_AK, MINIO

📅 Opened Sep 24, 2026💬 1 comment
Quality: 90/100Contribute

Background The e2e test suite contains a number of tests targeting the code-interpreter API. These tests depend on the code-interpreter SDK and a dedicated image, and carry a high maintenance cost. They should be removed across all languages. Test files to remove Language File Python tests/python/tests/test_code_interpreter_e2e.py Python tests/python/tests/test_code_interpreter_e2e_sync.py Go tests/go/code_interpreter_e2e_test.go JavaScript tests/javascript/tests/test_code_interpreter_e2e.test.ts C# tests/csharp/OpenSandbox.E2ETests/CodeInterpreterE2ETests.cs Related cleanup .github/workflows/real-e2e.yml: remove the run_code_interpreter_e2e input and the RUN_CODE_INTERPRETER_E2E env vars from all jobs tests/csharp/OpenSandbox.E2ETests/OpenSandbox.E2ETests.csproj: remove the ProjectReference to sdks/code-interpreter/csharp (after confirming no other tests use it) tests/javascript/package.json: remove the @alibaba-group/opensandbox-code-interpreter dependency and u

📅 Opened Sep 17, 2026💬 2 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute
Looking for more Python beginner tasks?Explore Python 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 opensandbox-group/OpenSandbox

When evaluating whether to contribute to opensandbox-group/OpenSandbox, 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 opensandbox-group/OpenSandbox acknowledge new external contributions in approximately -. Out of all submitted pull requests from non-core authors in the last 180-day window, 66.1% were successfully merged into the primary branch.

Frequently Asked Questions - Contributing to opensandbox-group/OpenSandbox

01

Is opensandbox-group/OpenSandbox welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

opensandbox-group/OpenSandbox has a recorded first-timer success rate of 59.1%. 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 66.4 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 66.4 places opensandbox-group/OpenSandbox in the Welcoming tier.

04

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for opensandbox-group/OpenSandbox?

The external pull request merge rate is 66.1%. 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 opensandbox-group/OpenSandbox?

Yes, opensandbox-group/OpenSandbox currently has 4 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 opensandbox-group/OpenSandbox 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.