Fix links

README.md

@@ -406,7 +406,7 @@ Command modifiers, like `release` and `debug`, can be specified with `-` or `/`
 build help
 ```
 
-For more info, see this PR: <https://github.com/abelbraaksma/TaskSeq/pull/29>.
+For more info, see this PR: <https://github.com/fsprojects/FSharp.Control.TaskSeq/pull/29>.
 
 ## Work in progress
 
@@ -505,12 +505,12 @@ module TaskSeq =
     val zip: source1: taskSeq<'T> -> source2: taskSeq<'U> -> taskSeq<'T * 'U>
 ```
 
-[buildstatus]: https://github.com/abelbraaksma/TaskSeq/actions/workflows/main.yaml
-[buildstatus_img]: https://github.com/abelbraaksma/TaskSeq/actions/workflows/main.yaml/badge.svg
-[teststatus]: https://github.com/abelbraaksma/TaskSeq/actions/workflows/test.yaml
-[teststatus_img]: https://github.com/abelbraaksma/TaskSeq/actions/workflows/test.yaml/badge.svg
+[buildstatus]: https://github.com/fsprojects/FSharp.Control.TaskSeq/actions/workflows/main.yaml
+[buildstatus_img]: https://github.com/fsprojects/FSharp.Control.TaskSeq/actions/workflows/main.yaml/badge.svg
+[teststatus]: https://github.com/fsprojects/FSharp.Control.TaskSeq/actions/workflows/test.yaml
+[teststatus_img]: https://github.com/fsprojects/FSharp.Control.TaskSeq/actions/workflows/test.yaml/badge.svg
 
-[1]: https://github.com/abelbraaksma/TaskSeq/issues/25
+[1]: https://github.com/fsprojects/FSharp.Control.TaskSeq/pull/25
 [2]: https://github.com/xunit/xunit/issues/2587
 [3]: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.collections.generic.iasyncenumerable-1?view=net-7.0
 [4]: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.collections.generic.iasyncenumerator-1.movenextasync?view=net-7.0

src/FSharp.Control.TaskSeq.Test/TaskSeq.Realworld.fs

@@ -185,8 +185,8 @@ type ``Real world tests``(output: ITestOutputHelper) =
         }
 
         // the following is extremely slow, which is why we just use F#'s comparison instead
-        // Using this takes 67s, compared to 0.25s using normal F# comparison.
-        do! ts |> TaskSeq.iter (should equal expected)
+        // Using the following line takes 6s, compared to 0.25s using normal F# comparison.
+        //do! ts |> TaskSeq.iter (should equal expected)
         do! ts |> TaskSeq.iter ((=) expected >> (should be True))
         do! task { do count |> should equal 4096 }
     }

src/FSharp.Control.TaskSeq.Test/TaskSeq.StateTransitionBug.Tests.CE.fs

@@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ let ``CE  empty taskSeq, GetAsyncEnumerator multiple times and then MoveNextAsyn
 // FIXED!
 // Previously: shaky test. Appears that this occasionally raises a NullReferenceException,
 // esp when there's stress (i.e. run all at the same time).
-// See https://github.com/abelbraaksma/TaskSeq/pull/54
+// See https://github.com/fsprojects/FSharp.Control.TaskSeq/pull/54
 [<Theory; ClassData(typeof<TestEmptyVariants>)>]
 let ``CE empty taskSeq, GetAsyncEnumerator + MoveNextAsync multiple times`` variant = task {
     let tskSeq = Gen.getEmptyVariant variant
@@ -68,7 +68,7 @@ let ``CE empty taskSeq, GetAsyncEnumerator + MoveNextAsync multiple times`` vari
 // This is the simpler version of the above test.
 [<Fact>]
 let ``BUG #54 CE with empty taskSeq and Delay, crash after GetAsyncEnumerator + MoveNextAsync 2x`` () = task {
-    // See: https://github.com/abelbraaksma/TaskSeq/pull/54
+    // See: https://github.com/fsprojects/FSharp.Control.TaskSeq/pull/54
     let tskSeq = taskSeq { do! Task.Delay(50) |> Task.ofTask }
 
     use enumerator1 = tskSeq.GetAsyncEnumerator()

src/FSharp.Control.TaskSeq/TaskSeqBuilder.fs

@@ -159,7 +159,7 @@ and [<NoComparison; NoEquality>] TaskSeq<'Machine, 'T
 
             // This ensures that, esp. in cases where there's no actual iteration (i.e. empty seq)
             // we can still detect completeness and prevent an incorrect jump in the resumable code.
-            // See https://github.com/abelbraaksma/TaskSeq/pull/54
+            // See https://github.com/fsprojects/FSharp.Control.TaskSeq/pull/54
             if not canMoveNext then
                 // Signal we reached the end.
                 // DO NOT call Data.builder.Complete() here, ONLY do that in the Run method.
@@ -329,7 +329,7 @@ type TaskSeqBuilder() =
                             // Signal we're at the end
                             // NOTE: if we don't do it here, as well as in IValueTaskSource<bool>.GetResult
                             // we either end up in an endless loop, or we'll get NRE on empty sequences.
-                            // see: https://github.com/abelbraaksma/TaskSeq/pull/54
+                            // see: https://github.com/fsprojects/FSharp.Control.TaskSeq/pull/54
                             sm.Data.promiseOfValueOrEnd.SetResult(false)
                             sm.Data.builder.Complete()
                             sm.Data.completed <- true