python/typeshed - Open Source PR Review Scorecard

Collection of library stubs for Python, with static types

C-Rank Grade: S (Elite) - 71/100

External PR Merge Rate: 75%

Response Time: 16h

First Timer Success: 67%

Frequently Asked Questions

Is python/typeshed welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

python/typeshed has a recorded first-timer success rate of 67.4%. 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 python/typeshed respond to incoming external pull requests in approximately 16.4 hours on average. Keeping PRs focused on single tasks and ensuring tests pass helps maintainers review faster.

What does the 71.4 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 71.4 places python/typeshed in the S tier.

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for python/typeshed?

The external contributor pull request merge rate for python/typeshed is 74.7%, based on public PR activity from non-core contributors.

Are there Good First Issues available in python/typeshed?

python/typeshed currently has 3 active issue(s) tagged with beginner-friendly labels like "good first issue", "beginner", or "up-for-grabs".

python
python/typeshedS•Elite5.1k
GitHub
Back to Explorer
python

python/typeshed

5,112
Active (30d)S•Elite(71/100)Python

Collection of library stubs for Python, with static types

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 python/typeshed. 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
16 hours
Standard maintainer review cycle

Average Response Latency

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

Merge Efficiency
74.7%
Moderate PR acceptance rate

External Acceptance Rate

Percentage of community pull requests successfully merged into main.

First-Timer Success
67.4%
Strong first-timer PR acceptance rate

First PR Conversion

Rate at which developers submitting their first repository PR succeed.

Active Maintainers
65 core
Highly collaborative maintainer core
Diagnostic Health HUD
74.7%
Merge Gauge
67.4%
1st-Timer
Community Vibe68/100

Embed C-Rank Badge

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

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

Active Good First Issues (5)

View on GitHub

Bug Report The following file is legal python, as far as I understand it: import codecs a = codecs.lookup("UTF-8") b = bytes(b"potato") c = a.decode(b, errors="replace") Running mypy 2.3.1 produces: $ mypy wibble.py wibble.py:5: error: Unexpected keyword argument "errors" for "__call__" of "_Decoder" [call-arg] wibble.py:5: note: "__call__" defined in "codecs" To Reproduce https://mypy-play.net/?mypy=latest&python=latest&gist=e34d60fa6ddb3835c9d2dae7eae7a301 Expected Behavior I would expect no message at all. Reasoning: https://docs.python.org/3/library/codecs.html#codecs.lookup describes what is returned from lookup https://docs.python.org/3/library/codecs.html#codecs.CodecInfo describes required API https://docs.python.org/3/library/codecs.html#codecs.Codec.decode describes that errors is parameter Actual Behavior False alarm is issued. Your Environment Mypy version used: 2.3.1 Mypy command-line flags: none Mypy configuration options from mypy.ini (and other config files): none

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

Run listed here: https://github.com/python/typeshed/actions/runs/35801713957

📅 Opened Sep 23, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 35/100Contribute

Run listed here: https://github.com/python/typeshed/actions/runs/31916575397

📅 Opened Aug 16, 2026💬 1 comment
Quality: 75/100Contribute

The type stubs for BaseEventLoop.create_server (here) consist over two overloads: # The first one specifies: host: str | Sequence[str] | None = None, port: int = ..., sock: None = None, # The second one specifies: host: None = None, port: None = None, sock: socket = ..., But the first of these causes a typing error if you pass None for the port (pyright playground), despite succeeding at runtime: import asyncio async def start(): loop = asyncio.get_running_loop() await loop.create_server(asyncio.Protocol) await loop.create_server(asyncio.Protocol, 'localhost') await loop.create_server(asyncio.Protocol, 'localhost', 8080) await loop.create_server(asyncio.Protocol, 'localhost') await loop.create_server(asyncio.Protocol, 'localhost', None) # Argument of type "None" cannot be assigned to parameter "port" of type "int" in function "create_server". This is documented as being valid as far back as Python 3.9. For some reason the 3.8 and earlier docs don't provide an

📅 Opened Aug 7, 2026💬 3 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute

The grpc.aio.ServerInterceptor is currently annotated using grpc.RpcMethodHandler. However the interface for grpc.RpcMethodHandler is not compatible with async RPC methods. The correct stub for an async version would make use of Awaitable and AsyncIterator: class RpcMethodHandler(abc.ABC, Generic[_TRequest, _TResponse]): request_streaming: bool response_streaming: bool # XXX: not clear from docs whether this is optional or not request_deserializer: _Deserializer[_TRequest] | None # XXX: not clear from docs whether this is optional or not response_serializer: _Serializer[_TResponse] | None unary_unary: Callable[[_TRequest, ServicerContext], Awaitable[_TResponse]] | None unary_stream: Callable[[_TRequest, ServicerContext], AsyncIterator[_TResponse]] | None stream_unary: Callable[[Iterator[_TRequest], ServicerContext], Awaitable[_TResponse]] | None stream_stream: Callable[[Iterator[_TRequest], ServicerContext], AsyncIterator[_TResponse]] | Non

📅 Opened Mar 8, 2026💬 1 comment
Quality: 30/100Contribute
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 python/typeshed

When evaluating whether to contribute to python/typeshed, 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 python/typeshed acknowledge new external contributions in approximately 16 hours. Out of all submitted pull requests from non-core authors in the last 180-day window, 74.7% were successfully merged into the primary branch.

Frequently Asked Questions - Contributing to python/typeshed

01

Is python/typeshed welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

python/typeshed has a recorded first-timer success rate of 67.4%. 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 ~16 hours. Keeping PRs scoped to single concerns and ensuring CI checks succeed will optimize review turnaround.

03

What does the 71.4 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 71.4 places python/typeshed in the Elite tier.

04

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for python/typeshed?

The external pull request merge rate is 74.7%. 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 python/typeshed?

Yes, python/typeshed currently has 3 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 python/typeshed 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.