Skip to content

Run the first launch metrics review #22

Description

@AzurLiu

Why

After the first public post, Falsiflow needs a concrete review loop: stars and forks are distribution signals, but install failures, repeated questions, demo confusion, and useful issue quality matter more.

Scope

Use the launch metrics plan to record the first public feedback window. Capture:

  • public post URLs
  • stars, forks, traffic/referrers if available
  • install/download signals if available
  • demo visits or clicks if available
  • repeated questions
  • broken install paths
  • docs or demo fixes created from feedback

Done when

  • The 24-hour snapshot is recorded in launch_metrics.md, a launch review issue comment, or a follow-up PR.
  • Repeated questions are converted into labeled GitHub issues.
  • Any urgent README/demo confusion has an owner and verification command.

Boundary

Do not treat stars as proof of quality. Use them only as one distribution signal alongside install success, issue quality, and repeated use cases.

Activity

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    help wantedExtra attention is neededlaunchPublic launch, demo, positioning, or adoption asset

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions