Extract from werkzeug.cache
C-Rank Grade: B (Solid) - 74/100
External PR Merge Rate: 100%
Response Time: 3d
First Timer Success: 100%
pallets-eco/cachelib has a recorded first-timer success rate of 100.0%. Repositories ranked B typically provide actionable feedback during code reviews and actively nurture new community contributors.
Maintainers in pallets-eco/cachelib respond to incoming external pull requests in approximately 72.0 hours on average. Keeping PRs focused on single tasks and ensuring tests pass helps maintainers review faster.
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 73.5 places pallets-eco/cachelib in the B tier.
The external contributor pull request merge rate for pallets-eco/cachelib is 100.0%, based on public PR activity from non-core contributors.
pallets-eco/cachelib currently has 11 active issue(s) tagged with beginner-friendly labels like "good first issue", "beginner", or "up-for-grabs".
Highly welcoming maintainers in pallets-eco/cachelib. Prompt code reviews with positive guidance for new contributors.
Discussions in pallets-eco/cachelib focus heavily on practical implementation feedback, code formatting standards, and issue reproduction details.
Unlinked PRs without issue context and changes that fail automated test suites face the highest review friction.
Average Response Latency
Tracks hours until a maintainer leaves a review, comment, or PR response.
External Acceptance Rate
Percentage of community pull requests successfully merged into main.
First PR Conversion
Rate at which developers submitting their first repository PR succeed.
Show contributors that your repository actively reviews and merges external pull requests.
[](https://getmerged.abhishekco.de/pallets-eco/cachelib?utm_source=github&utm_medium=badge)
External PR acceptance
First PR success rate
50% receive response in
90% receive response in
Maintainer review activity heatmap & prime window prediction
Calculating local time...
Calculating local time...
Detected: UTC
Maintainers are most responsive around 13:00 UTC (13:00 UTC in your timezone). Recommended submission window is Tuesday - Thursday from 11:00 to 15:00 UTC (11:00 - 15:00 UTC local).
Limited recent maintainer review activity recorded for this repository. Prediction based on heuristic baseline.
Maintainer Strategy: Maintainer Sweet Spot: PRs under 150 lines merge in ~47 hours (96% approval). Large PRs (>500 lines) take ~345 hours (45% approval). Keep your diff compact for rapid review.
Enter your branch size and test coverage below to forecast review turnaround and get 1-click git splitting commands.
Alternative open-source projects with active maintainers in Python.
TextAttack 🐙 is a Python framework for adversarial attacks, data augmentation, and model training in NLP https://textattack.readthedocs.io/en/master/
Code that makes the Iowa Environmental Mesonet run, or run into the ground.
A PyPI mirror client according to PEP 381 + PEP 503 + PEP 691
We use redis, valkey, mongodb, DynamoDB, etc.. These are external clients with different feature we have not changed any code in cachelib to support any new feature they released in the last two years. This issue is to evaluate what may or may not be needed from these clients and create more issues for specific features to support This is a research issue no code / docs needed findings will be reported back here. DynamoDB MemCached MongoDB Redis Valkey uWsgi Review Supported and Unsupported things in internal code: SimpleCache FileCache
If we were to add async support, which option is better 1 or 2? Add a new class parameter async=True, switch between normal and async client based on it, and implement async functions prefixed with the letter a then function name. ex. aget_many() or aset() Duplicate the entire class and add implementation for async functions without prefixing the function names. Instead, the class name will start with the word "Async". ex. AsyncSimpleCache etc.. I would like to know if anyone has better suggestions or modifications too
We use diataxis as a guide for how we structure our docs. In that framework, a tutorial is a complete step-by-step guide, coming from a clean starting point (or at least a known starting point). It's a learning guide, aiding knowledge acquisition. So please read the guide carefully to write the perfect tutorial. Notice that all documentation contributions should target stable branch. Contributing to pallets Docs: https://palletsprojects.com/contributing/ Contributing Documentation Specific Docs: https://palletsprojects.com/contributing/docs
We use diataxis as a guide for how we structure our docs. In that framework, a tutorial is a complete step-by-step guide, coming from a clean starting point (or at least a known starting point). It's a learning guide, aiding knowledge acquisition. So please read the guide carefully to write the perfect tutorial. Notice that all documentation contributions should target stable branch. Contributing to pallets Docs: https://palletsprojects.com/contributing/ Contributing Documentation Specific Docs: https://palletsprojects.com/contributing/docs
We use diataxis as a guide for how we structure our docs. In that framework, a tutorial is a complete step-by-step guide, coming from a clean starting point (or at least a known starting point). It's a learning guide, aiding knowledge acquisition. So please read the guide carefully to write the perfect tutorial. Notice that all documentation contributions should target stable branch. Contributing to pallets Docs: https://palletsprojects.com/contributing/ Contributing Documentation Specific Docs: https://palletsprojects.com/contributing/docs
Rate what actually matters after opening a pull request here.
Rate your first-hand PR experience (review speed, maintainer responsiveness, and onboarding ease) to help other contributors.
When evaluating whether to contribute to pallets-eco/cachelib, 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 pallets-eco/cachelib acknowledge new external contributions in approximately 2 days+. Out of all submitted pull requests from non-core authors in the last 180-day window, 100.0% were successfully merged into the primary branch.
pallets-eco/cachelib has a recorded first-timer success rate of 100.0%. Repositories ranked Solid typically provide actionable feedback during code reviews and actively nurture new community contributors.
The initial maintainer response time averages ~2 days+. Keeping PRs scoped to single concerns and ensuring CI checks succeed will optimize review turnaround.
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 73.5 places pallets-eco/cachelib in the Solid tier.
The external pull request merge rate is 100.0%. GetMerged isolates non-core community contributions so external developers get an accurate benchmark of PR acceptance probability.
Yes, pallets-eco/cachelib currently has 11 active issue(s) tagged with beginner-friendly labels. You can inspect these directly from the repository issues tab.
All metrics displayed for pallets-eco/cachelib 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.