问HN：我们是否需要一个更严格的代码审核流程？
现在，编写代码在很大程度上已经实现了自动化，我发现GitHub上充斥着大量低质量的内容，整体上使用代码（无论是工具还是软件本身）所产生的产品质量似乎在下降。在人工智能出现之前，情况相对简单：你可以观察星空，查看问题，浏览代码，并给这个仓库一个机会。而现在，生产的内容实在是太多了。
我认为这种情况在未来不会改变，所以我在想，或许可以从中做一些有趣的事情：
我的想法是创建一个基于 https://github.com/explore 的数据聚合器，专门面向开发者。可以把它看作是代码的“烂番茄”评分网站。以下是我想到的一些点子：
- 仓库根据技术栈、编程语言等进行分类，并赋予不同的评分。按类别和技术认证的经典作品。
- 每个仓库都有一个评分卡：
- 其依赖关系（过多的依赖可能导致膨胀）
- 随时间推移的问题进展（问题数量、解决问题所需时间）
- 维护者数量和声誉（频繁更换维护者 - 不好）
- 资金支持情况
这个平台允许用户设置自己的评分，提供比单纯的GitHub星标更细致的分布。它还允许用户将某些仓库列入黑名单，并提供一个MCP服务器，让用户的代理知道应该避免哪些内容。
你觉得这个想法怎么样？
查看原文
Now that writing code is largely automated, I've seen Github being filled to the brims with slop, and it feels like the overall quality of everything produced with code (either the tooling or the software itself) has been getting worse. Pre-AI, times were a bit simpler: You looked at the stars, looked at the issues, poked around the code, and gave the repository a chance. Today there's just way too much stuff being produced.
I don't see this changing in the future, so I was thinking that I'd be cool to make some spin out of it:
My idea is to create a data aggregator based on https://github.com/explore that is targeted towards developers. Think of it as the "Rotten Tomatoes" of code. Here are a few ideas that I've been bouncing around:
Repositories having different scores and being organized by tech stack, language, etc. Certified classics by category and technology.<p>Each repository has a scorecard.
- its dependencies (too much - potential bloat)
- issue progression over time (number of issues, time to close issues)
- by maintainer count and reputation (changes hands often - bad).
- by funding<p>Allows users to set their own rating, giving a more nuanced distribution than just github stars. It also allows users to blacklist repositories, and exposes an MCP server that allows one's own agents to know what to avoid.<p>What do you think?