Review economics
baskerville/bspwm
Read from the 72 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
72
Other PRs
72
Read
The rest — the latest 5
#1543 Fix floating window border offset bug in configure_request
0 reviews · 162.1d to merge
#346 Monocle fixes
0 reviews · 2h to merge
#1380 Refocus the focused window when receiving a FOCUS_IN event for root
0 reviews · 209.4d to merge
#1120 Fix parsing hidden field
0 reviews · 72.2d to merge
#985 Enforce strict mode of jsmn.
0 reviews · 1h 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 baskerville/bspwm 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 baskerville/bspwm — 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