whitesmith / whitesmith/rubycritic
Summary of all RubyCritic features that are lacking documentation.
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
discussion
good first issue
Hacktoberfest
- Dominant language
- Ruby
- Stars
- 3.5k
- Forks
- 234
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
I'd like to use this issue to summarize all features of RubyCritic that are lacking documentation.
For quite a few of them a paragraph would be enough.
So here we go:
- Explain our core metrics
- Explain GPA / score
- What's the configuration of our analyzers?
- Our ratings
- We now have a console report
- Add a minimum score option to the command line interface
- Open with browser
- The whole way we deal with the git history to gather metrics
That's all I can think of for now.
Anything else I'm missing?
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
Start with the unchecked item about how RubyCritic uses git history to gather metrics. Inspect the relevant repository code and existing documentation, then document the workflow and its purpose in a concise, discoverable section. Done means the git-history metric process is explained clearly and the documentation reflects the current behavior.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- ruby
- Domain
- documentation
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 3/5
- Estimated time
- 1-2 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100