Can we have a OpenAPI doc or swagger.yml file that documents the API? Possibly use redoc to create the apidocs

Is this open source version, or will it have support for the firbird database?

🌠项目主页，翻到最下面的Unsubscribe取消提醒

• 由于项目是纯前端代码，所以数据存储设计在了GitHub Issue中，这里就是数据库
• 对项目有其他问题请发起新的Issue，不要在此Issue中评论或者@他人
• 存储数据后才可在其他软件中（如微信）分享链接，否则其他人无法找到你的数据
• 存储数据后请在当前Issue中点击最下方的Unsubscribe按钮，以防邮件提醒
• Issue中可以随时删除评论数据
• 代码开源，网站开放，数据库开放，只统计公开仓库，不会存在数据安全问题
• 由于实时分析的瓶颈在于网络请求，默认每个repo只分析master分支

Hi, thanks for this great tool!

lighthouse-ci doesn't explain why it failed

accessibility: 92
best-practices: 86
seo: 100
pwa: 77
Failed. ❌

Error: lighthouse-ci test failed.

It would be nice to output per line failed assertions, e.g. failed due to pwa < 80

First of all, thank you for making this tool!
I tried it today, and saw that the excel report could be improved with data already present in the docx report

Expected behavior

The excel report includes summary metrics, such as

and

  | Cyclomatic Complexity | Cognitive

Let's say I have a singularity container with all of TorstyVerse installed: torstyverse.simg.

I can, for example, call mlst by: /path/to/img/torstyverse.simg mlst.

Could a --singularity-image option be added that points to the path.

The Makefile might then look something like this:

SINGULARITY := /path/to/img/img.simg
ASSEMBLER := cpus=$(CPUS) opts="" singularity=$(SING

not just compare different feature sets with a fixed builtin model, but users can also input a model of their own choice. it does not limit exploration of new models or pipelines - they can use implementation of best practices while evaluating the such new models on features of their choice