Review economics
Lymphatus/caesium-image-compressor
Read from the 62 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
62
Other PRs
62
Read
The rest — the latest 5
#379 Improve Hindi (hi_IN) translation - fix errors and add missing strings
0 reviews · 2.6d to merge
#364 i18n: add Korean
0 reviews · 18h to merge
#362 Updated fr_FR translation
0 reviews · 3.1d to merge
#106 Add Simplified Chinese translation
0 reviews · 6.6d to merge
#350 Add german translation
0 reviews · 4.3d 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 Lymphatus/caesium-image-compressor 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 Lymphatus/caesium-image-compressor — 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