10/10 points: Provide a valid pubspec.yaml

5/5 points: Provide a valid README.md

5/5 points: Provide a valid CHANGELOG.md

10/10 points: Use an OSI-approved license

Detected license: BSD-3-Clause.

0/10 points: 20% or more of the public API has dartdoc comments

OUT: Documenting click_text_field... Discovering libraries... Linking elements... Precaching local docs for 636011 elements... Initialized dartdoc with 815 libraries Generating docs for library suggest_click_text_field.dart from package:click_text_field/suggest_click_text_field.dart... Generating docs for library click_text_editor.dart from package:click_text_field/click_text_editor.dart... Generating docs for library click_text_field.dart from package:click_text_field/click_text_field.dart... Documented 3 public libraries in 59.4 seconds ERR: warning: ambiguous reexport of click_text_edit_controller.ClickTextEditingController, canonicalization candidates: (click_text_field, click_text_field) -> click_text_field (confidence 0.000) from click_text_edit_controller.ClickTextEditingController: (file:///tmp/pana_CLMZNO/lib/src/click_text_field/click_text_edit_controller.dart:20:7) click_text_field: 1.210 - (_Reason.packageName (+1.000), _Reason.longName (+0.01000), _Reason.sharedNamePart (+0.2000)) click_text_field: 1.210 - (_Reason.packageName (+1.000), _Reason.longName (+0.01000), _Reason.sharedNamePart (+0.2000)) Use {@canonicalFor click_text_edit_controller.ClickTextEditingController} in the desired library's documentation to resolve the ambiguity and/or override dartdoc's decision, or structure your package so the reexport is less ambiguous. The symbol will still be referenced in all candidates -- this only controls the location where it will be written and which library [46 more lines]

10/10 points: Package has an example

20/20 points: Supports 6 of 6 possible platforms (iOS, Android, Web, Windows, macOS, Linux)

• ✓ Android

• ✓ iOS

• ✓ Windows

• ✓ Linux

• ✓ macOS

• ✓ Web

0/0 points: WASM compatibility

This package is compatible with runtime wasm, and will be rewarded additional points in a future version of the scoring model.

See https://dart.dev/web/wasm for details.

40/50 points: code has no errors, warnings, lints, or formatting issues

Found 6 issues. Showing the first 2:

10/10 points: All of the package dependencies are supported in the latest version

To reproduce run dart pub outdated --no-dev-dependencies --up-to-date --no-dependency-overrides.

10/10 points: Package supports latest stable Dart and Flutter SDKs

20/20 points: Compatible with dependency constraint lower bounds

pub downgrade does not expose any static analysis error.