Looks nice, 0 dependency, simple design but there is one issue... I see that you don't have a single unit test or integration or functional etc. Even if your in house developers know what they are doing (which is a myth, stuff will break) it's going to be difficult accept contributions from community without any tests that make (almost) sure existing features are working with the changes.
Some of us believe that tests increase work by 25% while only reducing defects by 60%. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/wp-content/uploads/...
Interesting - that 25% seems to come from managers estimating the impact, not from developers.
Increase in time taken to code the feature because 15–20% 25–35% 15% 25–20%
of TDD (%) [Management estimates]
Another interesting observation from the outcome measures in Table 3 is the increase in
time to develop the features attributed to the usage of the TDD practice, as subjectively
estimated by management. The increase in development time ranges from 15% to 35%.
From an efficacy perspective this increase in development time is offset by the by the
reduced maintenance costs due to the improvement in quality (Erdogmus and Williams
2003), an observation that was backed up the product teams at Microsoft and IBM.