You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Eike Rathke <oo...@erack.de> on 2011/10/30 19:23:53 UTC
Ohloh
Hi,
Whoever had the brilliant idea to make Ohloh's source code repository
entry for OOo https://www.ohloh.net/p/openoffice point to the AOOo
repository instead trashed over 10 years worth of 10000s commits of 100s
developers. Congratulations.
Eike
--
PGP/OpenPGP/GnuPG encrypted mail preferred in all private communication.
Key ID: 0x293C05FD - 997A 4C60 CE41 0149 0DB3 9E96 2F1A D073 293C 05FD
Re: Ohloh
Posted by Eike Rathke <oo...@erack.de>.
Hi Rob,
On Monday, 2011-10-31 13:44:10 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> > http://www.ohloh.net/edits?page=3&project_id=openoffice
> >
> > Perhaps it is possible for ohioh.net to roll back to the state prior to Rob's changes as of October 11, 2011.
> >
>
> I did not remove any enlistments from the OOo project. I did add the
> Apache SVN to it.
And undid it again yesterday or the day before? Maybe that 'osde8info'
fouled things up.. I just undid a change where he undid the hg listing.
Let's see how Ohloh copes with those 2 repositories now.
> Note also that the way that project is configured, anyone can walk in
> off the street and add or remove enlistments. Not such a great idea,
> I think.
Worked fine for ~5 years, apart from some spam.
Eike
--
PGP/OpenPGP/GnuPG encrypted mail preferred in all private communication.
Key ID: 0x293C05FD - 997A 4C60 CE41 0149 0DB3 9E96 2F1A D073 293C 05FD
Re: Ohloh
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 2:42 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> On Oct 30, 2011, at 11:23 AM, Eike Rathke wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Whoever had the brilliant idea to make Ohloh's source code repository
>> entry for OOo https://www.ohloh.net/p/openoffice point to the AOOo
>> repository instead trashed over 10 years worth of 10000s commits of 100s
>> developers. Congratulations.
>
> http://www.ohloh.net/edits?page=3&project_id=openoffice
>
> Perhaps it is possible for ohioh.net to roll back to the state prior to Rob's changes as of October 11, 2011.
>
I did not remove any enlistments from the OOo project. I did add the
Apache SVN to it.
Note also that the way that project is configured, anyone can walk in
off the street and add or remove enlistments. Not such a great idea,
I think. You can see, for example, that LibreOffice project has
permissions set so only managers of the account can change these
settings. That seems like a good idea.
I've also created an "Apache OpenOffice" project. My preference is to
have a single project to show a continuous history, but that would
require that the manager of the existing OpenOffice project agree.
-Rob
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>
>>
>> Eike
>>
>> --
>> PGP/OpenPGP/GnuPG encrypted mail preferred in all private communication.
>> Key ID: 0x293C05FD - 997A 4C60 CE41 0149 0DB3 9E96 2F1A D073 293C 05FD
>
>
Re: Ohloh
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Oct 30, 2011, at 11:23 AM, Eike Rathke wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Whoever had the brilliant idea to make Ohloh's source code repository
> entry for OOo https://www.ohloh.net/p/openoffice point to the AOOo
> repository instead trashed over 10 years worth of 10000s commits of 100s
> developers. Congratulations.
http://www.ohloh.net/edits?page=3&project_id=openoffice
Perhaps it is possible for ohioh.net to roll back to the state prior to Rob's changes as of October 11, 2011.
Regards,
Dave
>
> Eike
>
> --
> PGP/OpenPGP/GnuPG encrypted mail preferred in all private communication.
> Key ID: 0x293C05FD - 997A 4C60 CE41 0149 0DB3 9E96 2F1A D073 293C 05FD
Re: Ohloh
Posted by Norbert Thiebaud <nt...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 3:12 PM, Michael Stahl <ms...@openoffice.org> wrote:
> it seems to me that there is some kind of counting error at the new
> OpenOffice.org project: a comparison with AOOo shows that it counts every
> commit twice.
Maybe because Rob registered the whole apache-ooo podling repo
(including wiki and website) _twice_ ? (
https://www.ohloh.net/p/openoffice/enlistments )
But, Hey! congrats to Eike, Pedro and you for you brand new Kudo Rank 10. :-D
Norbert
Re: Ohloh
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Andrea Pescetti
<pe...@openoffice.org> wrote:
> On 11/11/2011 Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 9:16 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>>
>>> Apache OOo is correct (Kudos to arist@) but it is
>>> reported as a duplicate and will be deleted.
>>
>> When it is "deleted" actually means it is merged, along with its
>> history, with the OpenOffice project.
>
> OK, and this is good! But still, it won't happen that
> http://www.ohloh.net/p/openoffice
> displays the pre-2011 history together with the "Apache era" history, right?
>
It merges the information that is there. It does not merge the
information that is not there. I have not seen a button for that. ;-)
> Regards,
> Andrea.
>
Re: Ohloh
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@openoffice.org>.
On 11/11/2011 Rob Weir wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 9:16 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>> Apache OOo is correct (Kudos to arist@) but it is
>> reported as a duplicate and will be deleted.
> When it is "deleted" actually means it is merged, along with its
> history, with the OpenOffice project.
OK, and this is good! But still, it won't happen that
http://www.ohloh.net/p/openoffice
displays the pre-2011 history together with the "Apache era" history, right?
Regards,
Andrea.
Re: Ohloh
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 9:16 PM, Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org> wrote:
> FWIW,
>
> Ohloh is getting everything wrong now:
>
> OpenOffice.org appears inactive.
>
> Apache OOo is correct (Kudos to arist@) but it is
> reported as a duplicate and will be deleted.
>
When it is "deleted" actually means it is merged, along with its
history, with the OpenOffice project.
> The license report shows:
>
> Apache License 2.0 24872 files
> GNU LGPL 3 7264 files
> BSD Copyright 315 files
> GNU LGPL 72 files
> GNU GPL2 29 files
> CDDL 2 files
> Python 2.4.2 license 1 file
>
> cheers,
>
> Pedro.
>
Re: Ohloh
Posted by Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org>.
FWIW,
Ohloh is getting everything wrong now:
OpenOffice.org appears inactive.
Apache OOo is correct (Kudos to arist@) but it is
reported as a duplicate and will be deleted.
The license report shows:
Apache License 2.0 24872 files
GNU LGPL 3 7264 files
BSD Copyright 315 files
GNU LGPL 72 files
GNU GPL2 29 files
CDDL 2 files
Python 2.4.2 license 1 file
cheers,
Pedro.
Re: Ohloh
Posted by Andrew Rist <an...@oracle.com>.
On 11/6/2011 8:30 AM, Dave Fisher wrote:
> On Nov 1, 2011, at 6:05 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>
>>
>> --- On Tue, 11/1/11, Eike Rathke<oo...@erack.de> wrote:
>> ...
>>
>>>> hmm, now Ohloh claims that i am the #1 contributor to
>>> OpenOffice.org, how
>>>> ridiculous is that...
>>> We're superseded by pfg now ;-)
>>>
>> Heh! I actually finished the bunch of issues I wanted to
>> see in AOO 3.4 so I'll give you guys some time to recover
>> positions :-P.
> Andrew Rist is going to beat everyone with the license header changes that are going in now!
>
> Regards,
> Dave
Doing the Ohloh dance while playing that Sugarhill Gang classic in the
background...
Andrew
Re: Ohloh
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Nov 1, 2011, at 6:05 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>
>
> --- On Tue, 11/1/11, Eike Rathke <oo...@erack.de> wrote:
> ...
>
>>
>>> hmm, now Ohloh claims that i am the #1 contributor to
>> OpenOffice.org, how
>>> ridiculous is that...
>>
>> We're superseded by pfg now ;-)
>>
>
> Heh! I actually finished the bunch of issues I wanted to
> see in AOO 3.4 so I'll give you guys some time to recover
> positions :-P.
Andrew Rist is going to beat everyone with the license header changes that are going in now!
Regards,
Dave
Re: Ohloh
Posted by Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org>.
--- On Tue, 11/1/11, Eike Rathke <oo...@erack.de> wrote:
...
>
> > hmm, now Ohloh claims that i am the #1 contributor to
> OpenOffice.org, how
> > ridiculous is that...
>
> We're superseded by pfg now ;-)
>
Heh! I actually finished the bunch of issues I wanted to
see in AOO 3.4 so I'll give you guys some time to recover
positions :-P.
Cheers,
Pedro.
Re: Ohloh
Posted by Eike Rathke <oo...@erack.de>.
Hi Michael,
On Sunday, 2011-10-30 21:12:58 +0100, Michael Stahl wrote:
> > As most of them were tracked as commits from our former release
> > engineers and so are misleading anyway, perhaps its not such a big loss. :-)
>
> indeed, because of the CVS and SVN approach to merge tracking authorship
> was not properly recorded for the most part of OOo history, so the loss is
> not big.
>
> but still, apparently Eike disagrees with that; it would have been nice to
> ask first before making this change.
I don't care much, Ohloh's statistics aren't worth a penny and as you
said Ohloh itself fouled up at times by not having been able to track
CVS or SVN branches and thus omitted more than 10000 of just my own
commits.. commits of developers not release engineers were recorded only
after the move to Mercurial again.
I just found it strange to discover that history has been rewritten.
> at least the historic data is still available at the LO project, the
> history there still begins with Heiner's initial CVS import:
> https://www.ohloh.net/p/libreoffice/
>
> the change seems especially pointless since there already was an Apache
> OOo project at Ohloh: https://www.ohloh.net/p/apacheoffice/
Which is why I didn't understand the move.
> it seems to me that there is some kind of counting error at the new
> OpenOffice.org project: a comparison with AOOo shows that it counts every
> commit twice.
Seems to be fixed.
> also, another deficiency of most SCM systems that makes Ohloh statistics
> unreliable is that they only track the committer, but not the author of a
> commit, which is not necessarily the same person (git gets this right).
The odds are 50/50 that also Ohloh gets that right for git..
> hmm, now Ohloh claims that i am the #1 contributor to OpenOffice.org, how
> ridiculous is that...
We're superseded by pfg now ;-)
Eike
--
PGP/OpenPGP/GnuPG encrypted mail preferred in all private communication.
Key ID: 0x293C05FD - 997A 4C60 CE41 0149 0DB3 9E96 2F1A D073 293C 05FD
Re: Ohloh
Posted by Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org>.
--- On Sun, 10/30/11, Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
,,,
> On 30 October 2011 21:40, Andrea
> Pescetti <pe...@openoffice.org>
> wrote:
> > Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> >>
> >> Someone should just create a SUN OpenOffice.org
> project
> >> at Ohloh and point it to the Hg mirror, that way
> people
> >> will get the credit they deserve.
> >
> > I agree; an "openofficeorg-legacy" project should be
> created and archived if
> > Ohloh is not able to track two repositories (the
> "legacy" one and the
> > current SVN at Apache). With all its limitations
> (inaccurate attribution and
> > so on) the legacy repository is still a valuable
> source of information.
>
> Perhaps hosted at apache-extras.org?
>
Its still WIP and will only cover SVN but check out
ooo-legacy-svn at apache-extras.
Cheers,
Pedro.
Re: Ohloh
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
On 30 October 2011 21:40, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@openoffice.org> wrote:
> Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>
>> Someone should just create a SUN OpenOffice.org project
>> at Ohloh and point it to the Hg mirror, that way people
>> will get the credit they deserve.
>
> I agree; an "openofficeorg-legacy" project should be created and archived if
> Ohloh is not able to track two repositories (the "legacy" one and the
> current SVN at Apache). With all its limitations (inaccurate attribution and
> so on) the legacy repository is still a valuable source of information.
Perhaps hosted at apache-extras.org?
Ross
--
Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
Programme Leader (Open Development)
OpenDirective http://opendirective.com
Re: Ohloh
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@openoffice.org>.
Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> Someone should just create a SUN OpenOffice.org project
> at Ohloh and point it to the Hg mirror, that way people
> will get the credit they deserve.
I agree; an "openofficeorg-legacy" project should be created and
archived if Ohloh is not able to track two repositories (the "legacy"
one and the current SVN at Apache). With all its limitations (inaccurate
attribution and so on) the legacy repository is still a valuable source
of information.
Regards,
Andrea.
Re: Ohloh
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Oct 30, 2011, at 1:43 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> hmm ..
>
> Someone should just create a SUN OpenOffice.org project
> at Ohloh and point it to the Hg mirror, that way people
> will get the credit they deserve.
>
> Assuming that Kudo level is so important ;).
On the other side when Andrew Rist commits the license header changes as a result of the Oracle SGAs then he will be at the top.
If someone adds the OOo website tree - now separate from the podling then I'll get "undeserved" kudos for migrating other peoples work ...
Regards,
Dave
>
> Pedro.
>
> --- On Sun, 10/30/11, Michael Stahl <ms...@openoffice.org> wrote:
> ...
>>> Am 30.10.2011 19:23, schrieb Eike Rathke:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Whoever had the brilliant idea to make Ohloh's
>> source code repository
>>>> entry for OOo https://www.ohloh.net/p/openoffice point to the AOOo
>>>> repository instead trashed over 10 years worth of
>> 10000s commits of 100s
>>>> developers. Congratulations.
>>>
>>> As most of them were tracked as commits from our
>> former release
>>> engineers and so are misleading anyway, perhaps its
>> not such a big loss. :-)
>>
>> indeed, because of the CVS and SVN approach to merge
>> tracking authorship
>> was not properly recorded for the most part of OOo history,
>> so the loss is
>> not big.
>>
>> but still, apparently Eike disagrees with that; it would
>> have been nice to
>> ask first before making this change.
>>
>> at least the historic data is still available at the LO
>> project, the
>> history there still begins with Heiner's initial CVS
>> import:
>> https://www.ohloh.net/p/libreoffice/
>>
>> the change seems especially pointless since there already
>> was an Apache
>> OOo project at Ohloh: https://www.ohloh.net/p/apacheoffice/
>>
>> it seems to me that there is some kind of counting error at
>> the new
>> OpenOffice.org project: a comparison with AOOo shows that
>> it counts every
>> commit twice.
>>
>> also, another deficiency of most SCM systems that makes
>> Ohloh statistics
>> unreliable is that they only track the committer, but not
>> the author of a
>> commit, which is not necessarily the same person (git gets
>> this right).
>>
>> hmm, now Ohloh claims that i am the #1 contributor to
>> OpenOffice.org, how
>> ridiculous is that...
>>
>> regards,
>> michael
>>
>>
Re: Ohloh
Posted by Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org>.
hmm ..
Someone should just create a SUN OpenOffice.org project
at Ohloh and point it to the Hg mirror, that way people
will get the credit they deserve.
Assuming that Kudo level is so important ;).
Pedro.
--- On Sun, 10/30/11, Michael Stahl <ms...@openoffice.org> wrote:
...
> > Am 30.10.2011 19:23, schrieb Eike Rathke:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Whoever had the brilliant idea to make Ohloh's
> source code repository
> >> entry for OOo https://www.ohloh.net/p/openoffice point to the AOOo
> >> repository instead trashed over 10 years worth of
> 10000s commits of 100s
> >> developers. Congratulations.
> >
> > As most of them were tracked as commits from our
> former release
> > engineers and so are misleading anyway, perhaps its
> not such a big loss. :-)
>
> indeed, because of the CVS and SVN approach to merge
> tracking authorship
> was not properly recorded for the most part of OOo history,
> so the loss is
> not big.
>
> but still, apparently Eike disagrees with that; it would
> have been nice to
> ask first before making this change.
>
> at least the historic data is still available at the LO
> project, the
> history there still begins with Heiner's initial CVS
> import:
> https://www.ohloh.net/p/libreoffice/
>
> the change seems especially pointless since there already
> was an Apache
> OOo project at Ohloh: https://www.ohloh.net/p/apacheoffice/
>
> it seems to me that there is some kind of counting error at
> the new
> OpenOffice.org project: a comparison with AOOo shows that
> it counts every
> commit twice.
>
> also, another deficiency of most SCM systems that makes
> Ohloh statistics
> unreliable is that they only track the committer, but not
> the author of a
> commit, which is not necessarily the same person (git gets
> this right).
>
> hmm, now Ohloh claims that i am the #1 contributor to
> OpenOffice.org, how
> ridiculous is that...
>
> regards,
> michael
>
>
Re: Ohloh
Posted by Michael Stahl <ms...@openoffice.org>.
On 30.10.2011 20:19, Mathias Bauer wrote:
> Am 30.10.2011 19:23, schrieb Eike Rathke:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Whoever had the brilliant idea to make Ohloh's source code repository
>> entry for OOo https://www.ohloh.net/p/openoffice point to the AOOo
>> repository instead trashed over 10 years worth of 10000s commits of 100s
>> developers. Congratulations.
>
> As most of them were tracked as commits from our former release
> engineers and so are misleading anyway, perhaps its not such a big loss. :-)
indeed, because of the CVS and SVN approach to merge tracking authorship
was not properly recorded for the most part of OOo history, so the loss is
not big.
but still, apparently Eike disagrees with that; it would have been nice to
ask first before making this change.
at least the historic data is still available at the LO project, the
history there still begins with Heiner's initial CVS import:
https://www.ohloh.net/p/libreoffice/
the change seems especially pointless since there already was an Apache
OOo project at Ohloh: https://www.ohloh.net/p/apacheoffice/
it seems to me that there is some kind of counting error at the new
OpenOffice.org project: a comparison with AOOo shows that it counts every
commit twice.
also, another deficiency of most SCM systems that makes Ohloh statistics
unreliable is that they only track the committer, but not the author of a
commit, which is not necessarily the same person (git gets this right).
hmm, now Ohloh claims that i am the #1 contributor to OpenOffice.org, how
ridiculous is that...
regards,
michael
Re: Ohloh
Posted by Mathias Bauer <Ma...@gmx.net>.
Am 30.10.2011 19:23, schrieb Eike Rathke:
> Hi,
>
> Whoever had the brilliant idea to make Ohloh's source code repository
> entry for OOo https://www.ohloh.net/p/openoffice point to the AOOo
> repository instead trashed over 10 years worth of 10000s commits of 100s
> developers. Congratulations.
As most of them were tracked as commits from our former release
engineers and so are misleading anyway, perhaps its not such a big loss. :-)
Regards,
Mathias
Re: Ohloh
Posted by Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org>.
--- On Sun, 10/30/11, Christian Grobmeier <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org> wrote:
> > I am not sure how Ohloh works, but I guess the
> alternative
> > was to leave it pointing to the previous Hg server
> that
> > is abandoned until it dies ... and then attribution
> > history would still be lost :(.
>
> Except if somebody would host the readonly, historic
> version of the hg repos, right?
>
There is one in bitbucket that I've dubbed the
the "unofficial OpenOffice.org historic archive".
All my respect to the people that made OpenOffice.org
great, but again the issue is that I am not sure how
Ohloh can point to that archive and not give the
impression that OpenOffice.org is dead.
I assume the current Ohloh maintainers did try.
Pedro.
> >
> > cheers,
> >
> > Pedro.
> >
> > --- On Sun, 10/30/11, Eike Rathke <oo...@erack.de>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Whoever had the brilliant idea to make Ohloh's
> source code
> >> repository entry for OOo https://www.ohloh.net/p/openoffice
> >> point to the AOOo repository instead trashed over
> 10 years
> >> worth of 10000s commits of 100s developers.
> Congratulations.
> >>
> >> Eike
> >>
> >> --
> >> PGP/OpenPGP/GnuPG encrypted mail preferred in
> all private
> >> communication.
> >> Key ID: 0x293C05FD - 997A 4C60 CE41 0149 0DB3
> 9E96
> >> 2F1A D073 293C 05FD
> >>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> http://www.grobmeier.de
>
Re: Ohloh
Posted by Christian Grobmeier <gr...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 8:56 PM, Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org> wrote:
> I am not sure how Ohloh works, but I guess the alternative
> was to leave it pointing to the previous Hg server that
> is abandoned until it dies ... and then attribution
> history would still be lost :(.
Except if somebody would host the readonly, historic version of the hg
repos, right?
>
> cheers,
>
> Pedro.
>
> --- On Sun, 10/30/11, Eike Rathke <oo...@erack.de> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Whoever had the brilliant idea to make Ohloh's source code
>> repository entry for OOo https://www.ohloh.net/p/openoffice
>> point to the AOOo repository instead trashed over 10 years
>> worth of 10000s commits of 100s developers. Congratulations.
>>
>> Eike
>>
>> --
>> PGP/OpenPGP/GnuPG encrypted mail preferred in all private
>> communication.
>> Key ID: 0x293C05FD - 997A 4C60 CE41 0149 0DB3 9E96
>> 2F1A D073 293C 05FD
>>
>
--
http://www.grobmeier.de
Re: Ohloh
Posted by Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org>.
Hi;
This is, of course, because we couldn't bring the history
to SVN.
I am not sure how Ohloh works, but I guess the alternative
was to leave it pointing to the previous Hg server that
is abandoned until it dies ... and then attribution
history would still be lost :(.
cheers,
Pedro.
--- On Sun, 10/30/11, Eike Rathke <oo...@erack.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Whoever had the brilliant idea to make Ohloh's source code
> repository entry for OOo https://www.ohloh.net/p/openoffice
> point to the AOOo repository instead trashed over 10 years
> worth of 10000s commits of 100s developers. Congratulations.
>
> Eike
>
> --
> PGP/OpenPGP/GnuPG encrypted mail preferred in all private
> communication.
> Key ID: 0x293C05FD - 997A 4C60 CE41 0149 0DB3 9E96
> 2F1A D073 293C 05FD
>