runme

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.