HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
Lxtharia
minegrub-theme
Python2023–2023
Lxtharia / minegrub-theme

minegrub-theme

A Grub Theme in the style of Minecraft!

4Distinct people
5Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
4.6KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

A Grub Theme in the style of Minecraft!

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 3:56:07 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by hour5 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2023-07-18 13:38:43 UTC to 2023-07-18 17:32:39 UTC.

012023-07-18 13:00:00 UTC to 2023-07-18 14:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 1 submissions, 0 commentsJul 18, 13:002023-07-18 14:00:00 UTC to 2023-07-18 15:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2023-07-18 15:00:00 UTC to 2023-07-18 16:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 commentsJul 18, 15:002023-07-18 16:00:00 UTC to 2023-07-18 17:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2023-07-18 17:00:00 UTC to 2023-07-18 18:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 commentsJul 18, 17:00

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
Jul 18, 13:002023-07-18 13:00:00 UTC2023-07-18 14:00:00 UTC110
Jul 18, 14:002023-07-18 14:00:00 UTC2023-07-18 15:00:00 UTC101
Jul 18, 15:002023-07-18 15:00:00 UTC2023-07-18 16:00:00 UTC101
Jul 18, 16:002023-07-18 16:00:00 UTC2023-07-18 17:00:00 UTC101
Jul 18, 17:002023-07-18 17:00:00 UTC2023-07-18 18:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

5 sources
Yep, the author of their readme is more interested in marketing their product than explaining how to get started using the project. It's honestly like the product person wrote the readme and not the engineers. And I consider that to be a pretty big red flag. At least, I'm not using the project any time soon because it's wasted my valuable time marketing to me instead to getting me straight to into the software. And it tracks me without my consent. Not a great readme... 0. There are tracking links in the readme?!? Ugh gross! Zzz... oh and btw: this readme tracks you even if you don't click links [vomit-emoji]. There's a tracking pixel loaded at the very end: <img referrerpolicy="no-referrer-when-downgrade" src="https://static.scarf.sh/a.png?x-pxid=841c3402-679b-456d-b528-537480a57269" /> 1. The Readme has images without accompanying t
Read the rest
ext, so it can't be read in a text editor right after you've cloned the repo. 2. It's littered with useless information and noise when my main goal of reading the readme is to get up and running quickly with the project. The contributors section is one example (and I mean just look at the source and try not to laugh): I can click the contributors link in github if I want to see that stuff, and an authors/contributors file is a better spot for that info regardless (and really you spent time on a bot for that). Further, the "getting started in 100 seconds" image-only link is in the features section with no accompanying text and there's a getting started link in the contributors section, they kinda get lost in the noise. 3. There's just one link to the documentation and it's pretty far down. I'd recommend linking to it much much earlier so users who just want to get started aren't wading through all the marketing gifs. 4. I don't think this readme is GDPR or CCPA compliant... but IANAL. Generally, a readme isn't a replacement for a marketing website especially for a product company. Maybe for a small open source entirely community driven effort most of their touchpoint will be a readme. But there's nothing organic about this readme, it's full of marketing fluff, tracking links, testimonials via contributor bubbles, and very little explanation of how app smith works, how you get started, example code, etc. Here's an example of a project with a really great readme: https://github.com/Lxtharia/minegrub-theme (it's just one of the other interesting links on HN today as well). And here's another one: https://github.com/stateful/runme. Not trying to be too harsh, it's an okay middle of the range readme all things considered. But is it great? ..Meh.
In How to write a great README
One spot where your readme misses the mark: it can't be read outside of github (or some rendering engine). Markdown is supposed to be human readable. Instead you say "here's how app smith works" and then plop a big image. That doesn't help anybody understand what your project does by reading the readme. Images and diagrams are super helpful, but they should accompany thoughtful prose. This is also important as an accessibility consideration. Next, contributors sections are dumb. Github is a better tool to use to view contributors (https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/graphs/contributors). Other projects before github would have an authors and/or contributors file. I don't care about the contributors when I'm trying to understand how your project works, it's just shameless marketing in that position. Finally, you have a "getting started
Read the rest
in 100 seconds" image CTA in your features section. Doesn't make any sense to me and again there's no supporting text. Overall I'd suggest focusing on improving your readme to be more useful and less of a marketing tool (it can still market its value lightly) and instead explain how the software works and how to get up and running with it. Overall I'd score your readme 4/10. Edit: here's a readme to compare/contrast with https://github.com/Lxtharia/minegrub-theme
In How to write a great README

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.