spectregrams/spectre - Open Source PR Review Scorecard

An SDR-agnostic program for recording radio signals and spectrograms (waterfall displays).

C-Rank Grade: B (Solid) - 52/100

External PR Merge Rate: 57%

Response Time: <1h

First Timer Success: -

Frequently Asked Questions

Is spectregrams/spectre welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

spectregrams/spectre has a recorded first-timer success rate of 0.0%. Repositories ranked B 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 spectregrams/spectre respond to incoming external pull requests in approximately 0.3 hours on average. Keeping PRs focused on single tasks and ensuring tests pass helps maintainers review faster.

What does the 51.7 C-Rank™ score (B 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 51.7 places spectregrams/spectre in the B tier.

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for spectregrams/spectre?

The external contributor pull request merge rate for spectregrams/spectre is 57.1%, based on public PR activity from non-core contributors.

Are there Good First Issues available in spectregrams/spectre?

spectregrams/spectre currently has 5 active issue(s) tagged with beginner-friendly labels like "good first issue", "beginner", or "up-for-grabs".

spectregrams
spectregrams/spectreB•Solid116
GitHub
Back to Explorer
spectregrams

spectregrams/spectre

116
InactiveB•Solid(52/100)Python

An SDR-agnostic program for recording radio signals and spectrograms (waterfall displays).

GitHub
Compare••
Jump to:

AI Maintainer Review Guidelines

Review Persona

Active Open-Source Maintainer

Warmth Score
7.8/10
Patience Score
8.2/10
Nitpick Rate
20%

Active maintainer team in spectregrams/spectre welcoming community pull requests and bug fixes.

Top PR Submission Do's

  • •Ensure code complies with repository style conventions
  • •Keep PRs focused and well-documented

Top PR Friction Pitfalls (Don'ts)

  • •Do not submit unlinked PRs without context
  • •Do not break existing automated test suites
Response Velocity
<1 hour
⚡ Fast reviewer response

Average Response Latency

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

Merge Efficiency
57.1%
Moderate PR acceptance rate

External Acceptance Rate

Percentage of community pull requests successfully merged into main.

First-Timer Success
0.0%
No first-timer merges recorded in window

First PR Conversion

Rate at which developers submitting their first repository PR succeed.

Active Maintainers
1 core
Single maintainer review bottleneck
Diagnostic Health HUD
57.1%
Merge Gauge
0.0%
1st-Timer
Community Vibe53/100

Embed C-Rank Badge

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

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

Active Good First Issues (5)

View on GitHub

When users create a config and use it to record data, they are thereafter blocked from updating it. This is enforced by _caution_update, which calls _has_batches. The intention is to protect users: once a config has been used to record data, updating it would cause it to no longer meaningfully represent the data already recorded. However, the REST API exposes no queryable locked state, so a client can only discover that a config is locked by attempting to update it, at which point the server rejects with a generic internal server error: spectre create config -t cw -r signal_generator -m cosine_wave spectre update config -t cw -p time_range=0.5 spectre record signal -t cw -d 5 spectre update config -t cw -p time_range=1.0 # An internal server error has occured. Received the following error: # raise FileExistsError(error_message) # FileExistsError: Files exist under the tag 'cw'. ... This is unintuitive. Config resources should expose a locked boolean that reflects whether batch file

📅 Opened Aug 15, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute

Description FITS files produced by IQStreamBatch.write_spectrogram are Single Image FITS (SIF): a primary header block followed by a single primary data array with no extensions. Recovering the time and frequency coordinate arrays requires reconstructing them from WCS keywords, adding some complexity for consumers of the files. The EXTEND keyword is hardcoded to False at _iq_stream.py#L291, with an inline TODO noting the intention to add an extension. FITS files produced by IQStreamBatch include a binary table extension, conforming to FITS Standard 3.0 Section 7, that carries the time and frequency arrays of the spectrogram as explicit columns. CallistoBatch.write_spectrogram already produces this structure, with TIME and FREQUENCY columns in a BinTableHDU, and serves as the reference implementation.

📅 Opened Jul 21, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 80/100Contribute

When running tests, a lot of deprecation warnings pop up from matplotlib. This can probably be addressed by bumping its version to the highest that is reasonable, then addressing any breaking changes from it. While preserving our own public CLI and REST APIs.

📅 Opened Jun 24, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 65/100Contribute

The public method which reads FITS files reconstructs the time and frequency world coordinates by materialising a NAXIS1xNAXIS2 array of pixel array indices in memory. This can be reduced, since it really only needs the indices at one fixed time and one fixed frequency. This will speed up plot creation time. At the same time, we can restrict the language from pixel_coordinates as written in the implementation to pixel_indices as per the FITS standard.

📅 Opened Jun 24, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 80/100Contribute

Currently, the shared Pydantic field output_type (see here) controls signal recording file formats. This name made sense during development, as it configures the sample types produced by each receiver in GNU Radio (e.g., here). However, from a user perspective, it's confusing. The "output type" of what? We'd like to rename this field to signal_format, which is more intuitive. A crude approach would simply change the name and update all references to it, but that would constitute a breaking change. Users may need to manually update their config or face errors. Instead, we want to maintain backwards-compatibility. Configs created before this change should continue to work exactly the same. Finding a solution to this special case will be valuable, as we're likely to bump into the same problem again in the future. One approach might make use of Pydantic aliases

📅 Opened Jan 19, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 70/100Contribute
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 spectregrams/spectre

When evaluating whether to contribute to spectregrams/spectre, 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 spectregrams/spectre acknowledge new external contributions in approximately <1 hour. Out of all submitted pull requests from non-core authors in the last 180-day window, 57.1% were successfully merged into the primary branch.

Frequently Asked Questions - Contributing to spectregrams/spectre

01

Is spectregrams/spectre welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

spectregrams/spectre has a recorded first-timer success rate of 0.0%. Repositories ranked Solid 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 ~<1 hour. Keeping PRs scoped to single concerns and ensuring CI checks succeed will optimize review turnaround.

03

What does the 51.7 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 51.7 places spectregrams/spectre in the Solid tier.

04

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for spectregrams/spectre?

The external pull request merge rate is 57.1%. 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 spectregrams/spectre?

Yes, spectregrams/spectre currently has 5 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 spectregrams/spectre 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.