Deepseek Reason
ruvnet/ruflo
Reasoning-mode completion against DeepSeek's deepseek-reasoner model (R1) via /v1/chat/completions.
A skill your agent uses when reasoning about how an ACL paper travels through ACL Rolling Review and conference commitment, covering reviewer and area-chair roles, meta-reviews, the commitment…
MITAuto-check passed
Install Acl Review Process
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill acl-review-process -a claude-codeProject install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills acl-review-process --agent claude-codeProject scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/ACL-Skills/skills/acl-review-process .claude/skills/acl-review-process && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.claude/skills/ instead of .claude/skills for a personal install. The folder must contain SKILL.md.
Claude Code skills documentation · loads skills from .claude/skills/
Install the "acl-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/ACL-Skills/skills/acl-review-process into .claude/skills/acl-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "acl-review-process", then confirm the skill loads.Claude Code copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$skill-installer install https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/ACL-Skills/skills/acl-review-processType this inside Codex. $skill-installer <name> installs a curated skill from openai/skills. The installer writes to $CODEX_HOME/skills (default ~/.codex/skills). Restart Codex if the skill does not show up.
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill acl-review-process -a codexProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.codex/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills acl-review-process --agent codexProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .agents/skills && cp -r skills-src/ACL-Skills/skills/acl-review-process .agents/skills/acl-review-process && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.agents/skills/ instead of .agents/skills for a personal install.
Codex skills documentation · loads skills from .agents/skills/
Install the "acl-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/ACL-Skills/skills/acl-review-process into .agents/skills/acl-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "acl-review-process", then confirm the skill loads.Codex copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill acl-review-process -a cursorProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.cursor/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills acl-review-process --agent cursorProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .cursor/skills && cp -r skills-src/ACL-Skills/skills/acl-review-process .cursor/skills/acl-review-process && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.cursor/skills/ instead of .cursor/skills for a personal install.
Cursor skills documentation · loads skills from .cursor/skills/, .agents/skills/, .claude/skills/, .codex/skills/
Install the "acl-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/ACL-Skills/skills/acl-review-process into .cursor/skills/acl-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "acl-review-process", then confirm the skill loads.Cursor copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ gemini skills install https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.git --path ACL-Skills/skills/acl-review-process--scope user (default) or --scope workspace; --path is the subfolder of the repo that holds the skill; --consent skips the security confirmation prompt.
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill acl-review-process -a gemini-cliProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.gemini/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills acl-review-process --agent gemini-cliProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .gemini/skills && cp -r skills-src/ACL-Skills/skills/acl-review-process .gemini/skills/acl-review-process && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.gemini/skills/ instead of .gemini/skills for a personal install, then run /skills reload.
Gemini CLI skills documentation · loads skills from .gemini/skills/, .agents/skills/
Install the "acl-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/ACL-Skills/skills/acl-review-process into .gemini/skills/acl-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "acl-review-process", then confirm the skill loads.Gemini CLI copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills acl-review-processInstalls for Copilot at project scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Preview a skill first with gh skill preview. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill acl-review-process -a github-copilotProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.copilot/skills/.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .github/skills && cp -r skills-src/ACL-Skills/skills/acl-review-process .github/skills/acl-review-process && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.copilot/skills/ instead of .github/skills for a personal install. Commit .github/skills so cloud agent and code review can use it.
GitHub Copilot skills documentation · loads skills from .github/skills/, .claude/skills/, .agents/skills/
Install the "acl-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/ACL-Skills/skills/acl-review-process into .github/skills/acl-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "acl-review-process", then confirm the skill loads.GitHub Copilot copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill acl-review-process -a opencodeOpenCode documents no install command of its own. Project install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.config/opencode/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills acl-review-process --agent opencodeProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .opencode/skills && cp -r skills-src/ACL-Skills/skills/acl-review-process .opencode/skills/acl-review-process && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.config/opencode/skills/ instead of .opencode/skills for a personal install.
OpenCode skills documentation · loads skills from .opencode/skills/, .claude/skills/, .agents/skills/
Install the "acl-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/ACL-Skills/skills/acl-review-process into .opencode/skills/acl-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "acl-review-process", then confirm the skill loads.OpenCode copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
Facts
- Skill name
acl-review-process- GitHub stars
- 1.2k
- Token cost
- ~1.5k tokens
- SKILL.md length
- 705 words
- Files
- 1
- Skills in repo
- 2,387
- Repo updated
- First seen
- Licence
- MIT
At a glance
A skill your agent uses when reasoning about how an ACL paper travels through ACL Rolling Review and conference commitment, covering reviewer and area-chair roles, meta-reviews, the commitment…
- Works in 7 steps: ARR cycle intake: submission on… → Review: at least three reviewers score… → Author response + discussion: authors… → …
- Reasoning about how an ACL paper travels through ACL Rolling Review and conference commitment
- SKILL.md covers The pipeline, stage by stage, Who decides what, Outcomes and what they mean and Reading your review package…, plus 5 more sections
- Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md
What it does
Acl Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when reasoning about how an ACL paper travels through ACL Rolling Review and conference commitment, covering reviewer and area-chair roles, meta-reviews, the commitment decision by senior area chairs and program chairs, Findings versus main-conference outcomes, ethics review escalation, and resubmission strategy across cycles.
Its SKILL.md is about 1.5k tokens, which your agent loads only when the skill is triggered. It is a single SKILL.md file with no bundled scripts.
The repository describes itself as: Journal-specific Claude Code/Codex skill packs covering mainstream journals — AER, QJE, Nature, Cell, 管理世界, 经济研究 & 200+ more — your fast track to getting published. ｜ 覆盖主流期刊的… The licence is MIT.
When your agent uses it
- Reasoning about how an ACL paper travels through ACL Rolling Review and conference commitment
- Covering reviewer and area-chair roles
- The commitment decision by senior area chairs and program chairs
- Findings versus main-conference outcomes
Example prompts
- “/acl-review-process”
Workflow steps
7 steps, taken from the first numbered list in SKILL.md.
- ARR cycle intake: submission on OpenReview to a dated cycle (e.g.,
- Review: at least three reviewers score and write reviews.
- Author response + discussion: authors reply; reviewers discuss and may
- Meta-review: the action editor / area chair synthesizes reviews into a
- Commitment: authors choose whether and where to send the finished
- Venue decision: the conference's senior area chairs and program chairs
- Ethics branch: papers flagged during review go to an ethics committee,
What it can do on your machine
Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit 932eb23. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.
Tool permissions
Pre-approves nothing: there is no allowed-tools line, so your agent's usual permission prompts apply.
From allowed-tools in the SKILL.md frontmatter.
Runs code
No scripts in the folder and no shell commands in SKILL.md.
From the folder's file list and the shell code blocks in SKILL.md.
Network
No URLs in SKILL.md.
From URLs in SKILL.md, links to its own repository left out.
Credentials
Names no API keys, tokens, secrets or passwords.
From names ending in _API_KEY, _TOKEN, _SECRET, _KEY or _PASSWORD in SKILL.md.
Context cost
Acl Review Process loads about 1.5k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 88 tokens; SKILL.md has 705 words of instructions outside code blocks.
Estimates: characters ÷ 4, the usual rule of thumb; real counts depend on the model's tokenizer. Scripts and assets cost tokens only if the agent reads them.
Safety
Auto-check passed
The automated check found no risky patterns in SKILL.md.
Automated static check — not a guarantee. Review scripts before installing. It scans the text of SKILL.md for risky patterns (piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files, hidden Unicode, destructive commands); files beside SKILL.md are not scanned.
SKILL.md
The full file from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills at commit 932eb23, republished under its MIT licence (© brycewang-stanford). 705 words, ~1,544 tokens.
Download SKILL.mdSave it as
.claude/skills/acl-review-process/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).- name
- acl-review-process
- description
- Use when reasoning about how an ACL paper travels through ACL Rolling Review and conference commitment, covering reviewer and area-chair roles, meta-reviews, the commitment decision by senior area chairs and program chairs, Findings versus main-conference outcomes, ethics review escalation, and resubmission strategy across cycles.
ACL Review Process
Use this to model where an ACL paper actually is and who decides what next. ACL decoupled reviewing from the conference: ARR produces the review package; the conference consumes it. Confirm current mechanics at aclrollingreview.org/reviewing, since cycle structure has changed repeatedly (most recently to 10-week cycles in 2025).
The pipeline, stage by stage
- ARR cycle intake: submission on OpenReview to a dated cycle (e.g., ARR January 2026); checks for format, Limitations, checklist, anonymity.
- Review: at least three reviewers score and write reviews.
- Author response + discussion: authors reply; reviewers discuss and may
update reviews (see
acl-author-response). - Meta-review: the action editor / area chair synthesizes reviews into a meta-review with a recommendation. Notably, ARR senior area chairs do not make accept/reject recommendations — that authority sits with the venue.
- Commitment: authors choose whether and where to send the finished package — ACL, or another *ACL venue accepting that cycle.
- Venue decision: the conference's senior area chairs and program chairs read reviews + meta-review and decide: main conference, Findings, or reject.
- Ethics branch: papers flagged during review go to an ethics committee, which can require revisions or recommend rejection on ACL Code of Ethics grounds independent of technical merit.
Who decides what
| Actor | Controls | Cannot do |
|---|---|---|
| Reviewer | Review text, scores, discussion updates | Accept or reject anything |
| AC / action editor | Meta-review, review-issue handling | Bind the conference's decision |
| Author | Response, revision, where/whether to commit | Change reviews after the cycle closes |
| Venue SACs + PCs | Main/Findings/reject from the ARR package | Re-run the reviewing itself |
| Ethics committee | Ethics-based conditions or rejection | Judge technical contribution |
Outcomes and what they mean
- Main conference: full acceptance with a presentation slot.
- Findings of ACL: peer-reviewed, Anthology-published acceptance for solid work that missed the main-program bar; typically without a main-stage oral. Citation-wise Findings papers perform respectably — treat it as a real publication decision, not a consolation to appeal.
- Reject at commitment: the ARR reviews remain attached to the paper's history; a stronger resubmission through a later cycle is the designed path.
Reading your review package strategically
- Weigh the meta-review over individual scores: it is the document venue chairs actually read.
- A package with one detailed negative review and a meta-review that endorses the objection rarely survives commitment — fix the objection in a new cycle instead of shopping the package to another venue unchanged.
- Conversely, mediocre scores with a meta-review noting resolved concerns can be worth committing: the venue decision is made on the whole record.
- A meta-review score at the floor triggers the resubmission constraint: within six months, only a wholesale revision avoids desk rejection.
Show full SKILL.md (277 more words)Show less
Venue-shopping within the ARR ecosystem
The same review package can be committed to exactly one venue at a time, but a rejected or withheld package can target a later conference (EMNLP, EACL, NAACL, AACL) whose commitment window accepts that cycle. Sequence deliberately: each conference publishes which ARR cycles it accepts, and reviews age — a package built on a two-cycle-old baseline set gets punished at commitment.
Anatomy of one 10-week cycle
week 0 submission deadline (AoE)
weeks 1-2 desk checks; reviewer + AC assignment
weeks 3-5 reviewing
week 5 reviews released -> author response (a few days)
week 6 reviewer discussion; reviews may be updated
weeks 7-8 meta-review written
~week 10 package complete -> commitment window for eligible venuesOffsets drift by cycle; the January 2026 cycle ran Jan 5 → reviews by early March → ACL 2026 commitment March 14. Always re-derive from the current dates page.
Reading reviewer language for what it predicts
- "The contribution is unclear" from two reviewers predicts a meta-review hedge — fix framing in the response, not just individual complaints.
- "Missing citation X, Y, Z" alone rarely sinks a paper; the same list attached to "novelty over X is marginal" usually does.
- A confident low-score review with factual errors is the best target for a review-issue flag plus a surgical rebuttal.
- Uniform middling scores with short reviews often mean poor reviewer fit; at commitment, venue chairs weigh the meta-review's own reading more — make sure the response arms the AC with the paper's best case.
Confidentiality and conduct boundaries
- Review content is confidential to the cycle; quoting reviews publicly (even anonymized) before decisions violates ARR expectations.
- Contacting reviewers or guessing identities is out of bounds; all communication flows through the OpenReview thread and the AC.
- Authors are bound by the ACL code of ethics throughout — including in how the author response characterizes reviewers' competence.
- Deadlines inside the cycle (response, discussion) are short and rarely extended; plan around them rather than requesting exceptions.
Output format
[Stage] cycle-intake / under review / response / meta-review / commit-window / venue decision / ethics review
[Package strength] <meta-review thrust + score pattern>
[Commit recommendation] commit to ACL / hold for revision / target sibling venue
[Ethics exposure] <flag risk and mitigation>
[Next actor to influence] <reviewer via discussion / AC via response / venue via commitment note>© brycewang-stanford, MIT. Rendered from Markdown: HTML in the file is shown as text, images as links, and headings moved down two levels. Raw file
Files
Just SKILL.md in ACL-Skills/skills/acl-review-process of brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.
Open the folder on GitHubat commit 932eb23
Compare with similar skills
Acl Review Process next to the 5 skills that share the most tags, products or categories with it. Stars are the repository's; “used in” counts other GitHub owners with a copy.
| Skill | Stars | Used in | Tokens | Auto-check | Licence | Repo updated |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Acl Review Process this skillbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills | 1.2k | — | ~1.5k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Deepseek Reasonruvnet/ruflo | 74k | — | ~626 | Automated safety check: Notes | MIT | |
| Ejentum Reasoning Harnesssickn33/agentic-awesome-skills | 47k | 1 repos | ~1.9k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Nowait Reasoning Optimizerdavila7/claude-code-templates | 33k | 2 repos | ~1.2k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Travel Plannersickn33/agentic-awesome-skills | 47k | 1 repos | ~2k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Analyzing Active Directory Acl Abusemukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills | 34k | — | ~1.1k | Automated safety check: Pass | Apache-2.0 |
Similar skills
Ejentum Reasoning Harness
sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills
MCP server exposing four cognitive harness modes (reasoning, code, anti-deception, memory).
Nowait Reasoning Optimizer
davila7/claude-code-templates
Implements the NOWAIT technique for efficient reasoning in R1-style LLMs.
Travel Planner
sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills
旅行/行程规划需求时使用:规划去某地旅行、X天X城、带老人孩子、自驾、假期安排等。产出逐日行程表、预算估算(经济/舒适/奢华三档)、交通住宿建议、景点美食清单。必须先问预算,预算未确认只输出问题清单;事实数据带来源和查询日期。
Analyzing Active Directory Acl Abuse
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills
Detect dangerous ACL misconfigurations in Active Directory using ldap3 to identify GenericAll, WriteDACL, and WriteOwner abuse paths
Recall Reasoning
parcadei/Continuous-Claude-v3
Search past reasoning for relevant decisions and approaches. An agent skill from parcadei/Continuous-Claude-v3.
More from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
All 2,387 skills in this repoAaag Data Analysis
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
A skill your agent uses when running and reporting the analysis for an Annals of the American Association of Geographers manuscript — spatial statistics and modeling, remote-sensing accuracy, or…
Aaag Literature Positioning
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
A skill your agent uses when positioning an Annals of the American Association of Geographers manuscript in the literature — engaging geographic scholarship across the relevant area and the…
Aaag Rebuttal
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
A skill your agent uses when responding to an Annals of the American Association of Geographers decision letter (major/minor revision) — building a point-by-point response to the subject editor and…
Aaag Research Design
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
A skill your agent uses when defending the research design of an Annals of the American Association of Geographers manuscript — spatial/quantitative analysis and GIScience, remote-sensing and…
Aaag Review Process
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
A skill your agent uses when you need to understand how the Annals of the American Association of Geographers evaluates a manuscript — double-anonymous review routed through a subject editor by…
Aaag Submission
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
A skill your agent uses when running the final pre-submission preflight for the Annals of the American Association of Geographers via ScholarOne Manuscripts — area/article-type selection…
Questions about Acl Review Process
What does Acl Review Process do?
A skill your agent uses when reasoning about how an ACL paper travels through ACL Rolling Review and conference commitment, covering reviewer and area-chair roles, meta-reviews, the commitment…. Acl Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when reasoning about how an ACL paper travels through ACL Rolling Review and conference commitment, covering reviewer and area-chair roles, meta-reviews, the commitment decision by senior area chairs and program chairs, Findings versus main-conference outcomes, ethics review escalation, and resubmission strategy across cycles.
When should I use Acl Review Process?
Acl Review Process fits situations like: reasoning about how an ACL paper travels through ACL Rolling Review and conference commitment; covering reviewer and area-chair roles; the commitment decision by senior area chairs and program chairs; findings versus main-conference outcomes.
How do I install Acl Review Process in Claude Code?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill acl-review-process -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (ACL-Skills/skills/acl-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .claude/skills/acl-review-process in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.
How do I install Acl Review Process in Codex?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill acl-review-process -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (ACL-Skills/skills/acl-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .agents/skills/acl-review-process in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.
Can I use Acl Review Process in Cursor, Gemini CLI or GitHub Copilot?
Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenCode also load SKILL.md folders. With the skills CLI, run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill acl-review-process -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/acl-review-process, .gemini/skills/acl-review-process, .github/skills/acl-review-process and .opencode/skills/acl-review-process in your project.
What does Acl Review Process need to run?
SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Acl Review Process is instructions for the agent only.
Does Acl Review Process access the network?
SKILL.md contains no URLs. Any network use would come from the scripts or tools the agent runs. This is read from the text; nothing was executed.
Is Acl Review Process safe to install?
Our automated static check of SKILL.md found no risky patterns, such as piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files or hidden Unicode. It is not a guarantee. Review the folder before installing.
What licence does Acl Review Process use?
Acl Review Process is published under the MIT licence (the repository's licence). It allows redistribution, so the full SKILL.md is shown on this page.
How many tokens does Acl Review Process use?
About 1.5k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 6.2k characters). Agents keep only the skill's name and description in context until a task matches; then they load SKILL.md in full.
What are the alternatives to Acl Review Process?
Skills that share tags, products or a category with Acl Review Process: Deepseek Reason (ruvnet/ruflo, 74k stars), Ejentum Reasoning Harness (sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills, 47k stars), Nowait Reasoning Optimizer (davila7/claude-code-templates, 33k stars) and Travel Planner (sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills, 47k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.
Who maintains Acl Review Process?
brycewang-stanford (a GitHub user) maintains it in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills, which has 1,231 GitHub stars. The repository holds 2,387 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on September 27, 2026.
Source: brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.