42

/ 100

GradeF

Some interest. A stronger README and CI would help.

Higher than 29% of 5,156 graded repos

Slides, recordings and materials of my public presentations, talks and workshops.

Jupyter Notebook91CC-BY-4.01mo ago

A low grade is a to-do list, not a judgment of your code

Most gaps here are documentation, tests, and setup, not the code itself. Closing your top 3 gaps alone would lift this repo to D (64).

See your top fixes
Now
F
42
Potential
D
64

Top fixes

Highest-impact changes first, ranked by point weight

15 to address
  1. 1
    Tests18pt

    Wire your tests to a documented command (e.g. a test script in your build config) so the suite is reproducible.

  2. 2
    CI/CD14pt

    If your CI lives elsewhere (a private repo that builds this one) or this project is itself a CI/CD tool, mark this check Not Applicable. Otherwise add a GitHub Actions workflow that runs tests on each push. It takes 15 minutes and reassures contributors their changes won't break things.

  3. 3
    README12pt

    Add a GIF, screenshot, or logo image. It is the fastest way to show what your project does.

  4. 4
    README12pt

    Show a quick-start snippet so contributors can see what using your project looks like.

Working through the fixes? Let every push regrade itself.

The free GitHub App rescans this repo on every push and posts the grade as a commit check, so the score climbs without coming back to rescan by hand.

Install the GitHub App

Scorecard

Every check, grouped by category and sorted worst-first

Documentation

43

Install and run instructions9pt0

No install instructions found in the README (−45 pts).

Add a section showing how to install dependencies.

Contributing guide5pt0

No CONTRIBUTING.md found (−47 pts base + up to −53 pts more for content).

Add a CONTRIBUTING.md telling newcomers how to get involved. Include setup, code style, test, and PR instructions.

README12pt65

README is present.

License6pt100

Licensed under CC-BY-4.0.

Engineering

31

CI/CD14pt0

No CI configuration detected in this repository.

If your CI lives elsewhere (a private repo that builds this one) or this project is itself a CI/CD tool, mark this check Not Applicable. Otherwise add a GitHub Actions workflow that runs tests on each push. It takes 15 minutes and reassures contributors their changes won't break things.

Linting and formatting5pt0

No linter or formatter config found.

Add a linter config such as .eslintrc.json, .prettierrc, ruff.toml, or .golangci.yml to enforce consistent code style.

Issue and PR templates6pt0

No issue or PR templates found (−100 pts).

Add .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/ with bug_report.md and feature_request.md to guide contributors. It dramatically improves issue quality.

Reproducibility6pt10

No dependency lockfile found (−70 pts).

Commit the lockfile for this project's package manager so installs produce the same dependency versions everywhere.

Tests18pt80

Test files detected (2018/02_noconname-lab/IOLI-crackme/bin-linux/test).

Project health

68

Dependency manifest6pt0

No dependency manifest detected at root.

Add a manifest (package.json, pyproject.toml, Cargo.toml, go.mod, etc.) so others can install dependencies in one command.

Repository metadata5pt100

Repository has a description.

Activity5pt100

Actively maintained (pushed within the last month).

Housekeeping3pt100

.gitignore present.

Repository health signals

Activity, community, and responsiveness at scan time

Activity

  • -
    Commits (30d / 90d)
  • 9
    Forks
  • 0
    Releases

Community

  • 42% - Weak
    Community health
  • 1 bus factorlow
    author own >50% of commits
  • 91
    Watchers

Responsiveness

  • -
    Median issue response
  • -
    Median PR merge time
  • 0
    Open issues
Repository files13 root entries
  • 2017
  • 2018
    Good: Test files detected (2018/02_noconname-lab/IOLI-crackme/bin-linux/test).
  • 2019
  • 2020
  • 2021
  • 2022
    Good: Environment pinned via 2022/01_r0-workshop/Dockerfile.
  • 2023
  • 2024
  • 2025
  • 2026
  • .gitignore
    Good: .gitignore present.
  • LICENSE.md
    Good: Licensed under CC-BY-4.0.
  • README.md
    Good: README is present.
    Good: README is well structured with multiple sections.
    Issue: No screenshots or images in the README (−20 pts).Fix: Add a GIF, screenshot, or logo image. It is the fastest way to show what your project does.
    Issue: README has no code examples (−15 pts).Fix: Show a quick-start snippet so contributors can see what using your project looks like.
    Good: README links to a live demo or deployed app.
    Good: README includes status badges.
    Issue: No install instructions found in the README (−45 pts).Fix: Add a section showing how to install dependencies.
    Issue: No run or usage instructions found (−45 pts).Fix: Add a section showing how to start or use the project.
RepoGrade badge preview

Add this badge to your README

It updates automatically each time the repo is re-graded.

[![RepoGrade](https://www.repo-grade.com/api/badge/arnaugamez/talks)](https://www.repo-grade.com/report/arnaugamez/talks)

More graded Jupyter Notebook repos