12 karma · joined March 16, 2026
When I started reading commit data, it became painfully apparent that a very large number of repos are tests, demos, or tutorials. If you have at least 1 star, that excludes most of those - unless you starred it yourself. Having 2 stars excludes the projects that are self-starred.
Starring is also quite common with my friends and colleagues as a way to find repos again later, so there is some use to it, but I agree it's not a perfect indicator of utility or quality.
But also, GitHub profiles and repos were at one point a window into specific developers - like a social site for coders. Now it's suffering from the same problem that social media sites suffer from - AI-slop and unreliable signals about developers. Maybe that doesn't matter so much if writing code isn't as valuable anymore.
What I mention first in my message was a much bigger driver - convenience. If the analytics become much more complex I might revisit DuckDB or another OLAP solution.
Unfortunately that type of analysis would take a bit more work, but I think the repo info and commit messages could probably be used to do that.
I have been enjoying looking into the projects that use it heavily. That one, for instance, was entirely built this year and the owner hasn't been active on GitHub before - again showing that agents are inviting people who either didn't have the skill or didn't have the time to build out some of their ideas.
Another view I like keeping an eye on is projects with higher star ratings - that often excludes the "pet projects" and gives you an idea of how larger teams or popular repos are applying it differently to the general "vibe coders".
I have also seen some benchmarks that suggest the gap between DuckDB and Postgres isn't always so substantial: https://jsonbench.com/#eyJzeXN0ZW0iOnsiQ2xpY2tIb3VzZSI6dHJ1Z...