Ask HN：我们需要更严格的代码审查流程吗？
3 分•作者: zaksa•11 天前
鉴于如今代码编写在很大程度上已自动化，我发现 GitHub 上充斥着大量粗制滥造的内容，感觉用代码（无论是工具还是软件本身）产出的整体质量都在下降。在人工智能出现之前，情况要简单一些：你看看星标数，看看问题列表，浏览一下代码，然后决定是否给这个仓库一个机会。如今，产出的东西实在太多了。
我预计这种情况在未来不会改变，所以我在想，能否从中衍生出一些东西：
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。你可以将其想象成代码界的“烂番茄”。以下是我的一些初步构想：
* 仓库根据技术栈、语言等进行分类，并拥有不同的评分。
* 按类别和技术划分的“认证经典”。
* 每个仓库都有一个评分卡，包含：
* 其依赖项（过多可能导致臃肿）
* 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（频繁易手 - 不好）
* 资金情况
* 允许用户设置自己的评分，提供比 GitHub 星标数更细致的分布。
* 还允许用户将仓库列入黑名单，并提供一个 MCP 服务器，让用户自己的代理程序知道要避免哪些内容。
你觉得怎么样？
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?