yingjie@memoir
Yingjie's Memoir

English

中文

English

中文

Appearance

2026-05-18 ​

Today I want to try working on Sub-challenge 3 as well — I feel that the more I do, the higher my chances of winning.

  • Time advantage: The teacher reviewing PRs seems to only have time to do reviews after work, so PRs submitted too late may not get much attention.
  • Goal: Sub-challenge 3: Build the Contributor Growth System Scenario in an end-to-end automated workflow.

Sub-challenge 3: Build an End-to-End Automated Workflow ​

Positioning: Combine existing capabilities to solve real problems | Difficulty: Low–Medium | No need for low-level code

Combine existing gitlink-cli commands and Skills (including custom Skills) to create a reproducible end-to-end automation scenario. The difference from Sub-challenge 2: Sub-challenge 2 delivers an independent reusable Skill, while Sub-challenge 3 delivers a complete solution that chains multiple steps together.

Scenario examples (not limited to):

  • Community operations automation: New Issue auto-classification → Assign responsible person → Generate weekly community report → Automatically publish Release Notes
  • Code quality gatekeeper: PR submission → Auto Review → Run CI → Summarize results in comments → Auto-merge if quality passes
  • One-click project initialization: Input project description → Create repo → Generate README/LICENSE/CI config → Create initial Issue and milestones
  • Multi-repo collaboration: Unified Issue tracking across repos, PR status dashboard, coordinated Release publishing
  • Contributor growth system: Track contributor PR/Issue activity → Generate contribution rankings → Auto-award badges

Deliverables:

  • The workflow chains ≥3 CLI commands or Skill invocations
  • If custom Skills are included, they must be compatible with at least one mainstream AI Agent
  • Provide a reproducible execution script or Agent conversation log
  • Run on at least one real GitLink project and demonstrate the results
  • Provide a workflow documentation and architecture diagram

The data needed for this scenario has already been prepared in my gitlink‑health Skill tasks.

Next tasks to complete:

  • [ ] Research contribution rankings & badges: openEuler, Gitee, international open source communities, etc.
  • [ ] Implement the contributor ranking page
  • [ ] Implement the badge page

Research on Contributor Growth Systems ​

openEuler ​

openEuler Contribution Dashboard:

  • Data overview: Community Users, Contributors, Organization Members, Pull Requests (PRs), Issues, Comments, Special Interest Groups (SIGs), Repositories
  • Organization member contributions: PRs, Issues, Comments
    • Statistics period: Per release
    • Display range: Top 10/20/All
    • Company name
  • Individual member contributions: PRs, Issues, Comments
    • Statistics period: Last month / Last six months / Last year / All
    • Top 1–10
    • Rank, ID, number of PRs
  • SIG Activity Panorama: Each column is a technical domain, with multiple SIGs in one column. The more active the group, the darker the color.
  • Community Governance & Operations: Each column is a direction, with multiple SIGs in each column
  • Technical Committee Member & SIG Relationship: SIG groups and contact information for the corresponding committee members

Big screen:

Organization member contributions:

Individual member contributions:

SIG Activity Panorama:

Community Governance & Operations:

For this GitLink scenario, wouldn’t it be enough to just do individual member contributions? Is it necessary to include organizations? I think for now, simply having a ranking of individual members’ contributions is good enough; organizations can be left as a future direction.