Review economics
ipfs/kubo
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.
≥0%
Attributed
a floor
0
Attributed PRs
100
Other PRs
100
Read
The rest — the latest 5
#11388 docs: fix private networks setup wording
1 reviews · 28.9d to merge
#11419 Merge release v0.43.0
0 reviews · 0h to merge
#11402 Release v0.43.0
0 reviews · 11.7d to merge
#11408 feat(cli): add --human and --sort-size to ipfs ls
1 reviews · 3.7d to merge
#11413 test: fix flakes that force CI re-runs
0 reviews · 4h to merge
How this was measured
0% of merged commits carry agent attribution — a floor, not the share; tools that only complete code inline leave no commit trail, so the unattributed side includes AI-assisted work; 1 PR came off an agent branch with no commit attribution, so the real share runs higher; reads 100 of 4810 merged PRs — the rest have not been analyzed yet.
Detected: OpenAI Codex, Claude Code.
“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 ipfs/kubo 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 ipfs/kubo — 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