Automating the community guide building process #21
Description
This sounds kinda weird to say it here, but I notice a few patterns:
- In OpenHands Issues page, they are able to fix up repo on their own with GitHub Actions, as well as doing authorization
- In RooCode Issues page, Dosu can be used to check on to external linkes and synthetize information
If we were to have an automated system to collect information that is worth adding into the repo, that could smooth things out a bit. The only issue here would be defining the scope of what can be added there.
- Direct IDE Toolings, tiered based on popularity
- Famous MCP and rule architectures for acceleration (e.g. "flow", "memory", "task")
- Ideal model selection based on price vs performance (e.g. function call, code, long context)
- Most common problems with these tools (e.g. getting keys, full self-hosting, installs)
- Other stuff I can't think of at the moment