Review economics
Tencent/puerts
Read from the 100 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
100
Other PRs
100
Read
The rest — the latest 5
#2350 fix(unreal): 修正 PIE 退出时序与 LatentInfo 默认参数生成
0 reviews · 4.9d to merge
#2348 Fix UE5.8 compile error
0 reviews · 6h to merge
#2346 feat: add TWeakObjectPtr support in TypeScript via UE.MakeWeakObjectPtr
0 reviews · 18h to merge
#2342 修复 pesapi-v8：pesapi_release_value_ref 未 Reset value_persistent 导致 marshal 的 JS 函数泄露
0 reviews · 41h to merge
#2336 Lua 区分整数/浮点数并校验 int32/uint32/uint64 范围
0 reviews · 4h 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; reads 100 of 554 merged PRs — the rest have not been analyzed yet.
“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 Tencent/puerts 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 Tencent/puerts — 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