Review economics
FiloSottile/mkcert
Read from the 53 most recently merged pull requests ·
Not enough merged pull requests on both sides yet to compare how they land in review.
—
Attributed
0
Attributed PRs
53
Other PRs
53
Read
The rest — the latest 5
#580 Fixed broken readme link to arch linux package
1 reviews · 4h to merge
#433 Build binaries for darwin/arm64
0 reviews · 3.5d to merge
#396 Add Windows arm64 build to CI pipeline
0 reviews · 247.1d to merge
#399 Correct failed to save CA cert message.
0 reviews · 233.5d to merge
#340 Linuxbrew -> Homebrew on Linux
0 reviews · 2h to merge
How this was measured
No commit in this window carries agent attribution, so there is no AI-authored share to read here — which is not evidence there is none; tools that only complete code inline leave no commit trail, so the unattributed side includes AI-assisted work.
“Attributed” means a commit carried an agent’s signature — a co-author trailer, an agent commit identity, or an agent bot account. Tools that only complete code inline leave no such mark, so the other column is “rest”, not “human-written”. Full method and its limits
The badge reads this repo’s current report, so it follows the number.
Tell me when this moves
We re-read FiloSottile/mkcert weekly and email only when the number changes materially.
Read your own repos
This one is public. For a private repo, run the same read locally through your own GitHub credentials — nothing is installed and nothing is sent to us.
npx @ambera/review-taxWant this continuously on FiloSottile/mkcert — each pull request paired to the task it came from, and the work graded from its review loop rather than its diff size? Claim this repo in Forge
Browse every repo people have read · Read a different repository