Way to rank resources

[TPreece101]

I love this repo, it has lots of great resources in it. I was wondering whether there is a way to rank the resources and display that rank in the README so that we can see which ones are the most popular e.g. Top 5 Chat modes

[aaronpowell]

Do you have any thoughts on how we could tackle this within the repo?

[sgbaird]

Do you have any thoughts on how we could tackle this within the repo?

First thing that came to mind was discussions (i.e., number of "+1's" via "sort by top" - e.g., #68), noting the ?sort=top.

I noticed there's a related discussion there which is pinned to the top of the discussion board: #68

[sgbaird]

Aside: what about gists? This is where I've been keeping mine prior to finding this repo:

https://gist.github.com/sgbaird/2f3a60084e1a73868a1a7cc33baf6d06

You can also mark to a specific revision, and gists can be starred and include comments. There is likely an automated way to display the number of stars in the README, similar to what you see with other "awesome" lists for repos.

[aaronpowell]

First thing that came to mind was discussions (i.e., number of "+1's" via "sort by top" - e.g., #68), noting the ?sort=top.

As in, having a discussion-per-file?

Aside: what about gists? This is where I've been keeping mine prior to finding this repo:

https://gist.github.com/sgbaird/2f3a60084e1a73868a1a7cc33baf6d06

You can also mark to a specific revision, and gists can be starred and include comments. There is likely an automated way to display the number of stars in the README, similar to what you see with other "awesome" lists for repos.

Having them in gists would make for a much more complex management. We'd have to have some process to pull "sync" with the gists, it'd be harder to enforce consistency across the files, we couldn't have any way to know if there was a new revision, and contributing would have more overhead. At least - that's my initial thinking on it, but I may be missing something here.

[vhbui02]

This is what I think the repo should have. Since the repository follows the "all contributor" rule, not all resources will have the same quality. There are some exceptionally good resources that I've used for a long time without needing to tweak anything and there are horrible resources filled with ambiguity that I can only salvage some of the content.

@aaronpowell Back to the main question, I back the idea that each file should maintain a seperate Gist file. I think it's GitHub's only feature to allow end-user providing simple, quick, active review and contribution.

it'd be harder to enforce consistency across the files, we couldn't have any way to know if there was a new revision, and contributing would have more overhead.

Can't Gist synchronization per-push be implemented with GitHub Actions?