docs: make issue and PR references readable instead of dead links

[alexdobin]

Issue and PR references in this repository identify entries in trackers that are not public. Nine of them were written as ordinary markdown links — so they looked like destinations and resolved to 404 when followed — and nothing anywhere said what the remaining nineteen bare gpudge_arc#N / shardad #N tokens were.

The only explanation lived inside an HTML comment at the foot of CHANGELOG.md, which renders to nobody. So the reader experience was: click #66, get a 404, no context.

What changes

The dead links become plain provenance tokens. [#66](…) is now `gpudge_arc#66`: the reference is kept, the invitation to click a page that does not exist is not. Seven links across CHANGELOG.md and the 2026-06-27 review report.

A visible note now says what the tokens are, in the three places a reader meets them without necessarily passing the others:

where	why there
top of CHANGELOG.md	the tokens start at the first entry
## Resolution status in the 2026-06-27 report	the densest run of them, and a page reached directly from the index
above the table in docs/reviews/README.md	it cites gpudge_arc#59 in a cell

shardad's two links are deliberately left as links: the README explains in the same breath that the repository is not public, and the link becomes correct rather than dead if that changes.

Verification

• Zero github.com/ArcInstitute/gpudge_arc URLs remain anywhere in the tree, down from 7, and no unexplained internal reference across all 78 files.
• This tree, no GPU: 626 passed / 202 skipped (828 collected). CI-equivalent, with shardad unimportable: 556 / 134. ruff check src/ tests/ examples/ clean.
• benchmarks/rapids_sc/, which lives only here, is byte-identical across the update — sha256 manifest before and after, 10 files, no diff.
• A regeneration from the same source diff -rqs clean against this branch.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[alexdobin]

/gemini review

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request replaces public GitHub issue and PR links with plain text provenance identifiers across CHANGELOG.md and review documentation, adding explanatory notes to clarify that these references point to a private tracker. The reviewer suggested formatting the note in docs/reviews/README.md as a blockquote and slightly adjusting the phrasing in docs/reviews/2026-06-27-gpudge-ultrareview.md to maintain consistency across the modified files.

[gemini-code-assist]

For visual consistency with the notes added in CHANGELOG.md and docs/reviews/2026-06-27-gpudge-ultrareview.md, consider formatting this note as a blockquote:

Issue and PR numbers on this page and in the reports — gpudge_arc#59 and
similar — are provenance: they identify entries in an issue tracker that is not
public and will not resolve from here.

[gemini-code-assist]

For phrasing consistency with the note in CHANGELOG.md ("They are kept so that..."), consider using "so that" here as well:

gpudge_arc#59 and similar tokens below are provenance, not links: they
identify entries in an issue tracker that is not public and will not resolve
from here. They are kept so that each disposition can be traced to the change that
made it.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

This PR improves documentation readability by replacing dead Markdown links to non-public issue/PR trackers with non-clickable provenance tokens, and by adding visible explanations of what those tokens mean.

Changes:

• Replaces Markdown links pointing at non-public gpudge_arc issues/PRs with inline-code provenance tokens (e.g., gpudge_arc#66).
• Adds explicit notes in key docs (CHANGELOG.md, review report, reviews index) explaining that these references are provenance and won’t resolve publicly.
• Removes the previously hidden HTML-comment-only explanation in CHANGELOG.md.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.

File	Description
docs/reviews/README.md	Adds a visible note explaining provenance tokens on the reviews index page.
docs/reviews/2026-06-27-gpudge-ultrareview.md	Replaces dead links with provenance tokens and adds an explanatory note in the densest reference section.
CHANGELOG.md	Adds an upfront explanation of provenance tokens and replaces dead links with tokens; trims obsolete hidden comment text.

---

💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.

[alexdobin]

Both consistency points accepted; one phrasing nit declined. Dispositions, and where each fix has to land:

@Copilot — the bare gpudge_arc#59 in the table. Accepted, though the stated mechanism does not hold: GitHub autolinks repo#N in conversations (issues, PRs, commit messages), not in rendered Markdown files in a repository, so this one is not silently becoming a link. The recommendation is right for a plainer reason — I checked the convention across the tree and it is 11 backticked vs 2 bare in Markdown, and one of those two bare tokens is this one. It should be `gpudge_arc#59`. The other, in docs/THIRD_PARTY_LICENSES.md, has the same problem and will be fixed with it.

@gemini-code-assist — blockquote the index note. Accepted. Two of the three notes are blockquotes and this one is a bare paragraph; that is an inconsistency a reader meets in sequence.

@gemini-code-assist — "so that" in the report. Declined. "kept so each disposition can be traced" is correct English and one word shorter; the two notes do not need identical phrasing to be consistent in substance.

Where they land. The content of this repository is generated from a single source, so neither accepted fix can be made on this branch — both come from upstream and arrive here on the next update. They are queued rather than dropped.

Not holding this PR for them. What it fixes is 28 references that a reader cannot follow, 9 of which render as ordinary links onto a 404. Holding that behind a backtick and a > would be the wrong trade. Merging; the two styling fixes ship with the next documentation pass.

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request replaces direct GitHub issue and PR links with plain text provenance tokens (e.g., gpudge_arc#59) across CHANGELOG.md and documentation files, adding explanatory notes that these references point to a private repository and will not resolve. The review comments suggest minor phrasing adjustments to these notes to ensure grammatical and stylistic consistency across all updated files.

[gemini-code-assist]

To maintain grammatical consistency with the note added to CHANGELOG.md, consider adding "that" after "so" in the final sentence.

Suggested change

	> `gpudge_arc#59` and similar tokens below are **provenance, not links**: they
	> identify entries in an issue tracker that is not public and will not resolve
	> from here. They are kept so each disposition can be traced to the change that
	> made it.
	> 'gpudge_arc#59' and similar tokens below are provenance, not links: they identify entries in an issue tracker that is not public and will not resolve from here. They are kept so that each disposition can be traced to the change that made it.

[gemini-code-assist]

To maintain consistency with the phrasing used in CHANGELOG.md and the ultrareview report, consider using the bolded "provenance, not links" terminology here as well.

Suggested change

	Issue and PR numbers on this page and in the reports — `gpudge_arc#59` and
	similar — are provenance: they identify entries in an issue tracker that is not
	public and will not resolve from here.
	Issue and PR numbers on this page and in the reports — 'gpudge_arc#59' and similar — are provenance, not links: they identify entries in an issue tracker that is not public and will not resolve from here.

[gemini-code-assist]

Understood. Thank you for the clarification on the disposition of these items and the rationale for proceeding with the current PR. It makes sense to prioritize the immediate fix for the dead links and documentation clarity, while tracking the remaining stylistic refinements for the next upstream update.