ghfind
← Back to Hall of Fame

🏆 Notable contributions

Popular open-source repos they've shipped to (commits + PRs)

Score breakdown

Account maturity10.0 / 10
Original project quality15.6 / 18
Contribution quality27.0 / 27
Ecosystem / maintenance impact8.0 / 20
Community influence4.9 / 8
Activity authenticity14.8 / 17

🛠 Featured work

Their own popular and pinned repositories

🧬 Stack & domains

Top languages
Go40%
Python19%
HTML17%
TypeScript12%
Shell3%
Makefile3%
Domains
cloudshellkubernetesterminaltty

🧬 Most similar developers

Closest profile, nearby score

🔥 Full roast

🔥 Ten-year account leaning on a single 659-star org-attributed project for clout, half your external PRs are just polishing doc windows for big-name repos, 28 of your 198 popular-repo contributions are

panpan0000 — 70.30/100 · SOLID (Solid · Trustworthy)

TL;DR: Long-time GitHub user with high volume of popular-repo PRs, but the vast majority of that impact is documentation/site/examples work rather than core engineering, so the original 80.3 score was overbaked and received a mandatory haircut.

DimensionScoreNotes
Account maturity10/10Registered 10.8 years, with contributions spanning 12 calendar years — no time-travel anomalies, just a long, consistent presence on the platform.
Original project quality15.6/18Total stars across all original repos sit at 671, almost all from the org-attributed cloudtty/cloudtty project (659 stars, quality score 1); every other original repo is starless or single-star with no meaningful standalone traction.
Contribution quality27/27221 merged PRs out of 414 total submissions; 38 maintainer-closed unmerged PRs, 41 author-closed external PRs, 21 author-closed own-repo PRs — a 15% rejection rate with no extreme red flags, though the doc-like share of work is unusually high.
Ecosystem / maintenance impact8/20198 PRs + 249 commits into 58 popular repos with a combined 3.8M+ stars; capped at 8 because the verified sample of your popular-repo contributions shows 28 docs/site/examples/templates PRs vs only 21 core code PRs, and your recent external PRs are 54% doc-like, confirming your ecosystem footprint is heavily documentation-centric rather than focused on core engineering.
Community influence4.9/876 followers and 54 following — a perfectly average, unremarkable follower ratio with no social proof boost to speak of.
Activity authenticity14.8/17245 contributions in the last year, with activity recorded as recently as today — activity is real and consistent, with no signs of botted or ghostwritten contributions.

Red flags

  • Your all-time popular-repo impact is heavily skewed toward documentation, site, example, and template work: the verified sample shows 28 doc-like contributions vs only 21 core code PRs, so your ecosystem footprint is mostly window dressing for big projects rather than meaningful core engineering input.
  • Your recent external PRs are 54% doc-like, just under the automatic cap threshold, but the pattern is unambiguously documentation-centric — you are far more likely to edit a README or site page than touch core runtime code in high-star repos.
  • Your only high-star original project is cloudtty/cloudtty, which is an org-attributed project you maintain rather than a solo-built flagship; all your own original repos are starless or single-star with no meaningful community traction, so your home turf is a barren wasteland compared to your big-project PR tourism.

Score calibration A -10 adjustment was applied to respect the impact quality cap: your all-time popular-repo contributions are documentation/site/examples-heavy, with a 54% recent external doc-like ratio and a verified sample split of 28 doc-like vs 21 core PRs, so the original 80.3 score overvalued non-core ecosystem work. No further adjustments were made.

Verdict Needs human review: on paper, your 221 merged PRs and 249 popular-repo commits look impressive, but the core engineering substance is too thin to support a high trust score without padding documentation and site work as equivalent to core code contributions.