docs: 0.3.0 adoption roadmap + contributor guide

[abhiksark]

What

Brings the public 0.3.0 adoption planning onto main and repairs the dev-behind-main drift.

• docs/roadmap/0.3.0.md — public 0.3.0 roadmap, organized by adoption funnel (discovery, first-run UX, motivation, curriculum ramp), linking issues Update README install & status for the live PyPI release #5–Gentle-ramp the first exercises of each topic #17 on the 0.3.0 milestone.
• CONTRIBUTING.md — issue-claim flow + good first issue / help wanted pointers to signal the project is active and open to contributors.
• README — Contributing section linking the roadmap and good-first-issues.
• docs/superpowers/specs/2026-06-02-gap-audit-design.md — gap-audit methodology spec (referenced by Gentle-ramp the first exercises of each topic #17).
• Catches dev up to main (it had fallen ~20 commits behind).

Why

Each roadmap issue (#5–#17) opens with a link to docs/roadmap/0.3.0.md. Those links resolve against the default branch (main), so merging this makes them work and the plan fully public.

Notes

• Docs-only; no code or curriculum changes.
• The issues, milestone, and labels are already live independently of this PR.

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Documentation
  • Expanded contribution guidelines with clearer issue-claiming and PR submission processes
  • Published 0.3.0 roadmap with tracked initiatives and release milestones
  • Added "Contributing" section to README linking to roadmap and good first issues

[coderabbitai]

Caution

Review failed

Pull request was closed or merged during review

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 4ed0d1dd-74b0-4e65-b6da-0624dce7850c

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between e08c5f2 and c3f4cf9.

📒 Files selected for processing (4)

• CONTRIBUTING.md
• Readme.md
• docs/roadmap/0.3.0.md
• docs/superpowers/specs/2026-06-02-gap-audit-design.md

📜 Recent review details

🧰 Additional context used

🪛 LanguageTool

docs/superpowers/specs/2026-06-02-gap-audit-design.md

[uncategorized] ~46-~46: Did you mean the formatting language “Markdown” (= proper noun)?
Context: ...-readable, for diffing across runs) - A markdown table embedded in the report. ### 1b. ...

(MARKDOWN_NNP)

---

[style] ~147-~147: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Consider rewording the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
Context: ... dependencies; script is stdlib-only. - No automated product-gap scoring (kept qua...

(ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE)

---

[style] ~147-~147: Try using a descriptive adverb here.
Context: ...d product-gap scoring (kept qualitative on purpose). - The report ranks candidates; it doe...

(ON_PURPOSE_DELIBERATELY)

CONTRIBUTING.md

[style] ~44-~44: Consider using the synonym “brief” (= concise, using a few words, not lasting long) to strengthen your wording.
Context: ...'re closing (Closes #NN``). - Include a short description, test output (`python -m py...

(QUICK_BRIEF)

🪛 markdownlint-cli2 (0.22.1)

docs/roadmap/0.3.0.md

[warning] 18-18: Tables should be surrounded by blank lines

(MD058, blanks-around-tables)

---

[warning] 30-30: Tables should be surrounded by blank lines

(MD058, blanks-around-tables)

---

[warning] 36-36: Tables should be surrounded by blank lines

(MD058, blanks-around-tables)

---

[warning] 42-42: Tables should be surrounded by blank lines

(MD058, blanks-around-tables)

🔇 Additional comments (16)

CONTRIBUTING.md (5)

3-12: LGTM!

---

14-21: LGTM!

---

26-32: LGTM!

---

36-38: LGTM!

---

42-46: LGTM!

Readme.md (1)

170-176: LGTM!

docs/roadmap/0.3.0.md (6)

1-16: LGTM!

---

17-27: LGTM!

---

29-33: LGTM!

---

35-39: LGTM!

---

41-44: LGTM!

---

46-58: LGTM!

docs/superpowers/specs/2026-06-02-gap-audit-design.md (4)

1-30: LGTM!

---

32-88: LGTM!

---

90-106: LGTM!

---

108-148: LGTM!

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

This PR establishes foundational guidance and planning for the 0.3.0 release: expanded contributor onboarding in CONTRIBUTING.md, a linked contribution section in README.md, a comprehensive 0.3.0 roadmap outlining discovery, UX, retention, and curriculum initiatives, and a design specification for a gap-audit playbook referenced in the roadmap.

Changes

Contributor Guidance and Release Planning

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Contributor onboarding and development setup CONTRIBUTING.md	Introduction and "Where the work is" section with roadmap and issue-label links; expanded "Claiming an issue" workflow; updated setup instructions with Python 3.9+ requirement and uv alternative; refined curriculum-change sync requirements and PR submission checklist including test output and TUI screenshots/GIFs.
Project discovery and 0.3.0 release roadmap Readme.md, docs/roadmap/0.3.0.md	New "Contributing" section in README links to roadmap and CONTRIBUTING.md; 0.3.0 roadmap defines terminal-native low-friction theme, north star, discovery initiatives (README/badge/listings), first-run UX (auto-init, onboarding screen), motivation features (progress, celebration screen), curriculum ramping, explicit out-of-scope items, and definition-of-done checklist.
Gap-audit playbook design specification docs/superpowers/specs/2026-06-02-gap-audit-design.md	Design spec for reusable gap-audit playbook: scope (curriculum + product gaps), deliverables (script output, baseline, report), curriculum audit method (keyword/API scan, internal consistency), product checklist structure (present/partial/missing scoring), report format and scoring rubric, component boundaries, non-goals, and rerun cadence.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~5 minutes

Poem

🐰 A roadmap unfurls, a path shining bright,
Contributors welcomed with guidance and light,
Gap-audits planned to measure the way,
From curious learner to dev-mastery day! 🌟

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Description check	⚠️ Warning	The PR description provides clear context (What/Why/Notes) but does not follow the required template structure with Summary, Tests, Screenshots, and Checklist sections.	Reorganize the description to match the template structure: add a Summary section, confirm Tests and Screenshots status, and include the required checklist with appropriate items marked.

✅ Passed checks (4 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The title accurately summarizes the main changes: documentation updates for the 0.3.0 adoption roadmap and contributor guide.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch dev

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}