>1k stars

[leogregianin]

The Russians criterion is more than 1k stars to enter in the list and for Brazilians is 100 stars.
Could we increase it to 500 or 1k so we don't have thousands of repositories?
Only incredible projects would enter this list.

[avelino]

I think it's very high entry barrier, star metric is not a good metric for a successful project.
I recommend reading this thread: avelino/awesome-go#1446 (comment)

[edkf]

Honestly, I would like to better understand this relationship between a project being useful to people and having a high number of stars on GitHub. I have a project that is mostly used by designers, the Tabipsum, and because most of them don't use GitHub, the number of stars is very low. I think it would be nice to have him on the list but I may be wrong too. I don't know if I didn't understand this limitation very well, but it must be because I'm not Dev 😅

[felipefialho]

Hi @leogregianin, I've have a lot of reflections about it and as @avelino said, 1K is a very high entry barrier to add a project here and we have a lot of awesome libs and projects made in brazil that don't have a lot of stars.

I added 100 stars just to avoid to include premature projects here.

Maybe we can increase it later, but for now we can add some rules to kind of projects that we will be accept 🤔

Do you agree?

[felipefialho]

Honestly, I would like to better understand this relationship between a project being useful to people and having a high number of stars on GitHub. I have a project that is mostly used by designers, the Tabipsum, and because most of them don't use GitHub, the number of stars is very low. I think it would be nice to have him on the list but I may be wrong too. I don't know if I didn't understand this limitation very well, but it must be because I'm not Dev 😅

Hi @edkf, exactly... Yesterday I refused some nice projects that don't have 100 stars. But unfortunately we need to some minimal requirements 😕

[leogregianin]

I would really like to see a few but awesome projects built or maintained by Brazilians. Code coverage and documentation would be fair criteria beyond the stars as a recognition of the community.

[felipefialho]

@leogregianin Yes, I agree and maybe we can add more restrictions when this project increase.

Change the minimal number of stars to 500 is not a bad idea, for now let's look at how it grows.

[leomaurodesenv]

Can I make a suggestion?
If you do, define a committee to evaluate, test projects and provoke discussion about their usability (in pull request - PR).
If this committee agrees with the PR, this project will be accepted. In this way, we can accept other types of projects, such as @edkf.

In resume, it is a tough question. 🤔

[felipefialho]

@leomaurodesenv Yes, is a good idea so we remove the need about 1000 stars for example. But how you imagine this committee to evaluate?

[leomaurodesenv]

The main problem of any committee: the evaluation are subjectives.
Usually, a committee is formed by an odd number of people (3, or 5) that evaluate a set of subjects for each work. For example:

• Is it an open source project?
• What is the purpose of your work?
• What is the impact - in some areas?
• How easy is it to replicate or reproduce?
• ....

In each of these subjects has a predefined score (from 0 to 5), and each score has a definition. For example:

• 0 - do not attend this subject
• 1 - a specific impact area
• ....
• 5 - a large impact for any area

At last, the committee argue their score for each subjects - and the author can refuse each score and discuss contrary.

Something in that way... But again, it is a tough question.