Define how partners should be ranked
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- TypeScript
- Stars
- 6.9k
- Forks
- 6.5k
- Avg merge
- 2d 8h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 29
Description
We should document how partners are ranked, since up until now I was the one who assigned the rankings, and they were based on my own subjective criteria from quite a while ago.
My reasoning was that a higher number meant a higher priority:
- Tier 3: Critical infrastructure, or partners that covered multiple categories.
- Tier 2: Partners that provide an important service in a single category (e.g. ESP or Security).
- Tier 1: Partners that support non-critical infrastructure, such as downloads or content.
I don't think these criteria should just be based on my personal opinion, though. They should be documented and agreed upon by the people who oversee the project as a whole.
Contributor guide
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
No file, test, or entry point is identified; start by reviewing the proposed Tier 1–3 criteria in this issue and the discussion from project overseers. Done means the ranking criteria are agreed upon and documented in the appropriate project documentation.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Domain
- documentation
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Quiet
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100