skip to content
← Back to @ecgang's résumé

Contribution dossier

Work on 3x-ui

@ecgang · mhsanaei/3x-ui

The contributions, their acceptance, and the review behind them. Each record links to the original work.

MergedRecord checked Sep 2, 2026

mhsanaei/3x-ui#5809

[Feature]: Add a tooltip/hint to the "Password" field in the client form clarifying which protocols use it

Merged by a repo maintainer. The merger is independent of the contributor.

No independent human reviews on record.

View pull request on GitHub ↗

closes #5803

Explore the evidence

clean execution — merged with zero human change-requests

Repository standing: established · merger independent

0 human change-requests on record

This contribution was a medium-sized pull request (99 additions, 2 deletions across 15 changed files) that was linked, via GraphQL issue-linkage data, as closing issue #5803.

The PR was merged by a party recorded as independent of the contributor, under a 'frictionless_merge' decision pattern: zero human-requested changes, a single review round, and a review thread that was fully resolved (1 of 1 threads). No rubber-stamp risk was flagged for this merge.

03competencies

  • Code authorshipMEDIUM

    The change was a contained, non-deletion-heavy modification (99 additions vs. 2 deletions, 15 files), consistent with authored feature or fix work rather than large-scale removal or churn.

  • Iterative refinementNO SIGNAL

    shown as absent, not inferred

  • Independent reviewNO SIGNAL

    shown as absent, not inferred

  • Defect resolutionNO SIGNAL

    shown as absent, not inferred

  • Repository standingMEDIUM

    The contributor is recorded at an 'established' provenance tier with the contribution counted at full weight.

  • Issue linkageMEDIUM

    The PR was formally linked to closing issue #5803 via GraphQL-sourced linkage data, indicating the work was tied to a tracked repository issue rather than being unscoped.

AI summary of the evidence on this page. No new facts introduced.

independent human review

No independent human reviews on record.

automated review tools

  • Rf7db7e95fa17b366 — commented

self-review — diligence, not validation

+99 −215 files1 review round1/1 threads resolved

timeline

  1. commit 97bedfa0
  2. opened
  3. review · B · Rf7db7e95fa17b366 · COMMENTED
  4. commit 07942cfa
  5. review · C · Re6a08b11cfd14434 · COMMENTED
  6. merged

review threads: 1 resolved · 0 unresolved(engagement, not validation)

How to read the evidence

01 how scrutiny is counted

A · independent human

A maintainer or collaborator who is not the contributor. The real signal — weighted highest.

B · repo automation

Configured bots and CI review tools. Neutral — volume is not rigor, so it is never added to human review.

C · self-review

Review the contributor ran on their own work. A process signal — diligence, not external validation — kept separate.

06 how to read this

  • Self-review is diligence, not validation — it never counts as external acceptance.
  • Automation volume is not rigor — a wall of bot comments proves nothing about the work.
  • An abnormally fast merge of a large diff is a risk flag, not an achievement.
  • Lines changed is not a score — a large deletion or refactor can be as valuable as a large addition.

method: harvested from public GitHub · deterministic derivation · third-party identities redacted by default

No endorsement by any maintainer, reviewer, or repository is implied.