I've been using deno for years and built some nontrivial services in it. When deno added support for npm packages, the early days were pretty rough. I ran into lots of issues with packages and spent a lot of time reading random github issue threads. It's been pretty smooth sailing for the last year or so though.

At least I can use ai to help migrate off of deno.

https://dbushell.com/2026/03/20/denos-decline-and-layoffs/

As I’ve worked on this, the tool has grown to show more usage patterns across all of your sessions. It shows overall usage, estimated working time and overlapping sessions, and where your spend is coming from across models and cache misses. I also have a few session level metrics with percentile breakdowns, along with a list of your sessions and high level info.

Clicking into a session opens an explorer where you can see individual model calls and tool inputs and outputs. You can also jump directly to where a cache miss happened. There’s also a rough cost comparison that shows what the recorded session would have cost with another model’s pricing, or for Anthropic, with 5m vs 1h caching.

In the future, I’d love to collect more information to see which patterns might make people’s workflows more expensive, e.g. long sessions, high context usage, many turns, etc.

The tool requires deno, but is just one command to run once that is installed. The demo provided has some of the data scrubbed, but helps to show what it looks like before running it.

Would appreciate any thoughts or ideas

https://github.com/dpclark4/frugal-tokens

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49364223

Points: 37

# Comments: 10

My app was built to visually explore repositories from different angles

On the trends page, for some repos, you can see that the velocity hasn't materially went up, at least as a function of merged PRs (not that it is the only unit of value). But if you look at posthog, they seem to be crushing it and have a significant jump in merged PRs in the last few months

@dang do you know if got changed or if you can help changing this back?

I think of this as an improved GitHub Insights page, with faster performance, more detail, and a focus on how work moves through a codebase. The main entity is a contributor, which has two sides: authoring PRs and reviewing/giving feedback to others. From there, you can see repository wide stats, user interactions, contribution trends, file health, and collaboration patterns. Some insights are useful for understanding velocity and code health in the AI era.

Details for each page:

- Homepage: A high level summary of the repository. Showing age, file types, active contributors, new and churned users. I track the author age at merge, so you can see the tenure of people shipping changes over time.

- File explorer: One of my favorite parts. I build a graph of files, tracking renames and moves, to build a complete history. Rolling up, every file and folder is assigned an outlook such as active, developed, stale, touched by people who are likely gone. You can easily see contributor timelines, recent changes, and for some files, their rename/move history and related files that often change together (useful for a coding agent).

- Trends: The densest page, showcasing the velocity of contributions and trying to understand if AI is helping ship more. Charts are cut by year for comparisons, tracking PR size, output, rounds of review, and approval latency by different percentiles. PRs are further cut into bucketed sizes to help drill in deeper. Helps to show that smaller PRs are likely still faster to ship while very large PRs (product of AI?) are slowing down.

- Relationships: A graph of interactions between contributors, weighted by PR activity, with a simple algorithm. Communities are grouped with links showing one way vs bidirectional. You can adjust time or raise the score to filter out noise. Clicking on contributors shows the scores of interactions and if they mostly give or receive feedback.

- Contributors: Search all contributors, showing a few lifetime metrics. Clicking in shows an overview of their profile with some high level details. A few author/reviewer specific stats are shown across four time frames with their rank, each row is clickable. Below that is recent author/reviewer PR activity, including rounds, comments, and review timing.

- Author/Reviewer reports: A handful of metrics showing performance of a contributor from both sides of a PR, one as an author and one as a reviewer. Cells are color coded and bucketed into tiers to easily see where someone sits in the repository. Can be filtered by user, team, or time.

Couple of key terms and limitations:

- Contributor is any account that has authored or commented on a PR that’s been merged. This can include bots - Round of review / “round” occurs when a nonauthor leaves comments and the author pushes more commits; tries to simulate a back and forth. - “Effective" approval is the approval that actually matters for merging, i.e. the first approval after the last round of review. Example: A opens a PR, B approves, C then requests changes and A pushes more commits, C approves, C's approval is the effective one (B's is stale). - Trends/Reports can be filtered by team but unfortunately without a private API key, I cannot sync teams. For a few repos I have created a few small teams

Please take a look, there's a lot of buttons, dropdowns, and clickable links. The demo repos were selected because they are private companies building in the open, with patterns similar to private repos: smaller contributor sets and more activity per contributor.

Appreciate any feedback below or at hey@devthropology.com

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48848819

Points: 37

# Comments: 10

“While breadth comes from reading and talking and seeing, depth comes from doing. The way to really learn about some domain is to have to solve problems in it”

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15431233

Points: 2

# Comments: 0