docs: add no-code contribution paths and ROADMAP.md

CONTRIBUTING.md

@@ -146,6 +146,129 @@ ARCHETYPES.set("mobile-engineer", {
 
 ---
 
+## Contributing Without Code
+
+You don't need to write TypeScript to make a meaningful contribution. Most of
+the work that makes this project useful — research, rules, anti-patterns,
+sample CVs, translations, docs — comes from people with domain expertise, not
+engineering skills. If you've ever reviewed a friend's CV, you've already done
+80% of the work for several of these paths.
+
+### Five ways to contribute without coding
+
+#### 1. Add a research source
+
+Every scoring rule and keyword list should trace back to evidence — recruiter
+interviews, hiring-manager surveys, market data. We currently cite 250+
+sources in [`research/sources.md`](research/sources.md). The bar to add one is
+low and the impact is real.
+
+**How to do it:**
+1. Find a credible source (recruiter post, hiring study, industry report).
+   Personal blogs and unsubstantiated opinions don't count — published or
+   institutional sources where possible.
+2. Open an issue with the `research` label. Include:
+   - The source (URL + author + date)
+   - The specific claim it supports
+   - Which rule, archetype, or anti-pattern it backs
+3. A maintainer will review and merge it into `research/sources.md` (or open a
+   PR if you'd like to do it yourself).
+
+**Example:**
+> Source: "The 7 Things Recruiters Look For First" — John Smith, 2025.
+> Supports: `keywordMatch` rubric dimension.
+> Specific claim: "80% of recruiters spend less than 6 seconds on initial scan;
+> keyword presence is the dominant factor in pass/fail."
+
+**Time cost:** 10–20 minutes per source.
+
+#### 2. Propose an anti-pattern
+
+Every archetype ships with an `antiPatterns` list — phrases like *"passionate
+about products"*, *"leveraged synergies"*, *"team player"*, *"familiar with X"*
+that read as filler to recruiters. These come from real CVs and real recruiter
+feedback, not from a textbook. If you've spotted one in the wild, add it.
+
+**How to do it:**
+1. Find a phrase in your own CV (or a friend's) that you now realize was filler.
+2. Check [`packages/core/src/archetypes/`](packages/core/src/archetypes/) — if
+   it's not already listed for the relevant archetype, open an issue with the
+   `rules` label.
+3. Include:
+   - The phrase
+   - Which archetype it's relevant to (or "all")
+   - Why it reads as filler (1–2 sentences)
+
+**Time cost:** 5–10 minutes per anti-pattern.
+
+#### 3. Provide a sample CV (or job description)
+
+We don't have public test fixtures. That means contributors writing scoring
+rules have nothing to test against, and users have nothing to compare their
+own CV to. A small library of sample CVs — deliberately imperfect, with weak
+metrics, vague impact, missing quantification — would unlock both contributor
+testing and user demos.
+
+**How to do it:**
+1. Author a fictional CV: 1 page, 3–5 years of experience, deliberately
+   include 2–3 weak spots. Or anonymize your own.
+2. Pair it with a fictional job description.
+3. Open an issue with the `examples` label and attach both files (or paste
+   inline).
+4. Maintainers will add to `examples/` (we'll create the directory).
+
+**Time cost:** 30–45 minutes per pair.
+
+#### 4. Improve the docs
+
+Docs gaps are everywhere. The `docs/` directory has architecture notes, a
+phase-1 plan, and an issues seed — but no contributor onboarding doc, no
+"frequently asked questions," no "I just got a bad score, what do I do"
+guide, no CLI troubleshooting, no glossary of evaluation terms. Each of
+these is a 1-page writeup.
+
+**How to do it:**
+1. Pick a gap from the list above (or one you've personally hit).
+2. Write the doc in `docs/`.
+3. Open a PR using the branch naming `docs/<your-doc>`.
+
+**Time cost:** 30–90 minutes per doc.
+
+#### 5. Triage issues and help others
+
+The fastest way to become a recognized contributor is to be the person who
+answers questions. Right now most issues get one response from a maintainer
+— if you can answer even one open issue, you free maintainer time and signal
+"I'm here, I know this codebase."
+
+**How to do it:**
+1. Look at issues with the `help wanted` or `good first issue` label.
+2. If you can answer a question (even partially), comment. If you can reproduce
+   a bug, comment with the steps.
+3. If you're confident a label is missing or an issue is a duplicate, suggest
+   it via a comment (maintainers will adjust labels).
+
+**Time cost:** 5–15 minutes per issue.
+
+---
+
+### How to submit a non-code contribution
+
+The workflow is the same as code, minus the obvious steps:
+
+1. **Open an issue first** using the most relevant label (`research`, `rules`,
+   `examples`, `docs`). Comment "I'll take this" to claim it.
+2. **For docs / examples:** fork → branch → PR. Branch-naming
+   conventions from the [Development Workflow](#development-workflow) section
+   still apply (`docs/<your-doc>`, `archetype/<your-archetype>`, etc.).
+3. **For research / anti-patterns / triage:** an issue is enough — no PR
+   needed unless you want to write the change yourself.
+
+A maintainer will respond within 48 hours. If you don't hear back, ping the
+[Telegram group](https://t.me/techimmigrants).
+
+---
+
 ## Guidelines
 
 - **One issue = one PR.** Don't bundle unrelated changes.

ROADMAP.md

@@ -0,0 +1,93 @@
+# Roadmap
+
+This file tracks **what we're actively working on right now** and **what's
+open for grabs**. For the **vision** (v0.1, v0.2, v0.3), see the
+[README Roadmap section](README.md#roadmap). This file is the **current state**
+— what maintainers and contributors are doing this week and next.
+
+## How to read this
+
+- 🚧 **In progress** — assigned, being worked on, has an ETA. Don't pick up
+  unless you coordinate with the assignee.
+- 🎯 **Up next** — open for grabs. Comment "I'll take this" on the linked
+  issue to claim it. Every item here is sized for one PR.
+- 🅿️ **Parked** — explicitly deprioritized for now. Pick up only after
+  discussion with a maintainer.
+
+**If you're a new contributor, start in 🎯 Up next.** Every item there has
+an acceptance bar reachable in a single sitting (1–4 hours).
+
+---
+
+## 🚧 In progress
+
+| Item | Owner | ETA | Notes |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| **Merge Phase-1 stack** — PRs [#68](https://github.com/TechImmigrants/cv-builder/pull/68), [#69](https://github.com/TechImmigrants/cv-builder/pull/69), [#70](https://github.com/TechImmigrants/cv-builder/pull/70), [#71](https://github.com/TechImmigrants/cv-builder/pull/71), [#72](https://github.com/TechImmigrants/cv-builder/pull/72), [#73](https://github.com/TechImmigrants/cv-builder/pull/73) | @saharpak | **ASAP** | Open since 2026-06-07. Currently the single biggest contributor-experience blocker — new contributors cloning `main` get a different product than what's documented. **Reviewer help urgently wanted — see below.** |
+| CV/JD input screen with file upload — PR [#76](https://github.com/TechImmigrants/cv-builder/pull/76) | unassigned | TBD | Two-column input screen. Depends on Phase-1 merge. |
+| CodeRabbit config expansion — PR [#75](https://github.com/TechImmigrants/cv-builder/pull/75) | unassigned | TBD | Per-package review guidance. |
+| Rule: flag outdated technologies — PR [#74](https://github.com/TechImmigrants/cv-builder/pull/74) | unassigned | TBD | Resolves issue [#53](https://github.com/TechImmigrants/cv-builder/issues/53). |
+| CI: web UI deploy previews on Cloudflare Pages — PR [#78](https://github.com/TechImmigrants/cv-builder/pull/78) | unassigned | TBD | Path-filtered workflow. |
+
+> ### ⚠️ Reviewer help wanted on Phase-1 PRs
+>
+> The bottleneck isn't writing code — it's review bandwidth. If you have
+> **TypeScript + zod** experience and can review one of #68–#73, comment on
+> the PR. A 30-minute review from someone other than the maintainer unblocks
+> the entire stack and signals to the rest of the contributor base that the
+> project is moving.
+
+---
+
+## 🎯 Up next — open for grabs
+
+These have linked issues, explicit acceptance criteria, and a one-PR-sized
+scope. **Comment "I'll take this" on the issue to claim.**
+
+| Item | Effort | Issue | Notes |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| Add integration test for full evaluation pipeline | M (2–4 h) | [#51](https://github.com/TechImmigrants/cv-builder/issues/51) | `help wanted`, `core`. End-to-end test of `evaluate()`. |
+| Add GitHub Actions workflow for lint + tests | S (1–2 h) | [#46](https://github.com/TechImmigrants/cv-builder/issues/46) | `help wanted`, `core`. May already partially exist — check `.github/workflows/` first. |
+| Convert `types.ts` to Zod schemas | M | [#47](https://github.com/TechImmigrants/cv-builder/issues/47) | `enhancement`, `core`. |
+| Add example test CVs for local development | S (30–60 min) | [#50](https://github.com/TechImmigrants/cv-builder/issues/50) | `good first issue`. Author 2–3 fictional CVs + 1 JD. |
+| Rule: flag generic summary / objective section | S | [#45](https://github.com/TechImmigrants/cv-builder/issues/45) | `good first issue`, `rules`. |
+| Rule: detect missing action verbs in bullet points | S | [#52](https://github.com/TechImmigrants/cv-builder/issues/52) | `good first issue`, `rules`. |
+| Rule: flag outdated technologies | S | [#53](https://github.com/TechImmigrants/cv-builder/issues/53) | `good first issue`, `rules`. **PR #74 already in flight — check before starting.** |
+| Add per-dimension feedback strings to evaluator | S | [#48](https://github.com/TechImmigrants/cv-builder/issues/48) | `enhancement`, `core`. |
+| Fix: flag missing contact information | S | [#55](https://github.com/TechImmigrants/cv-builder/pull/55) | `core`. PR already open — needs review. |
+| New archetype: **AI Engineer** | M | (open issue) | Use the [New Archetype template](.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/new_archetype.md). Top priority for the 2026 market. |
+| New archetype: **AI Product Manager** | M | (open issue) | Top priority for the 2026 market. |
+| New archetypes: Backend / Frontend / DevOps | M each | (open issue) | Currently advertised in README but unimplemented. |
+| Land CONTRIBUTING.md "no-code" section | S | (open issue) | The draft this file came from. |
+| Write `docs/faq.md` ("I got a bad score, what now?") | S | (open issue) | |
+| Write `docs/cli-troubleshooting.md` | S | (open issue) | |
+| Write `docs/evaluation-glossary.md` | S | (open issue) | |
+
+---
+
+## 🅿️ Parked
+
+| Item | Why parked | When to revisit |
+|---|---|---|
+| PDF export | Real effort; needs design decisions (template engine, fonts, ATS-safe output). | After Phase-1 merge + web UI MVP. |
+| VS Code / Cursor extension | Significant scope; needs stable core API first. | After PDF export and at least 8 archetypes shipped. |
+| Self-hosted deployment guide | Requires production stability first. | After v0.2 lands. |
+| LLM-enhanced mode (rewrite suggestions) | Cost implications and prompt-design work. | After core scoring is stable. |
+| Side-by-side tailoring editor | Needs mature web UI. | After web UI MVP ships. |
+| Localization (multiple languages) — beyond README | Translation tooling, RTL support, glossary. | After first 3 README translations land. |
+| Before/after examples library | Needs curation and editorial review. | After core scoring is stable. |
+
+---
+
+## How to influence this roadmap
+
+- **Pick up an item from 🎯 Up next** — comment "I'll take this" on the issue.
+- **Suggest new items** — open an issue with the relevant label.
+- **Push a 🅿️ Parked item** — if you think something should be un-parked,
+  open an issue with the `roadmap` label and the rationale.
+- **Help review Phase-1 PRs** — the single highest-leverage thing a
+  TypeScript-comfortable contributor can do this week.
+
+---
+
+*Last updated: 2026-06-22*