Refocus readme to usage of goavro rather than 2.0 justification
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Go
- Stars
- 1.1k
- Forks
- 232
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
I think the readme would be much more useful if some more key examples were added to the readme (I think the OCF reader should be on the front page). I think the 2.0 changes should be at the bottom.
As a side note, I think the library could be less confusing if the concept of "native go" was more defined more prominently, and perhaps actually toned down in the actual api. For me the largest use-case is to scan to a struct & visa versa. I don't see people using the go native map to access data.
Just some constructive criticism for you to use as you'd like
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start with the README and review its current examples, especially the OCF reader and explanations of “native Go.” Compare the existing README structure with the requested focus on common struct-based usage and move the 2.0 discussion lower. Done means the README clearly prioritizes usage examples and explains the relevant concepts without requiring this issue’s author to infer the intended structure.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- go
- Domain
- documentation
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100