Community
Participate
Working Groups
A number of active committers on the org.eclipse.osee project are listed as inactive. My hypothesis is that this is due to the activity statistics being computed by looking at the committer only. If this is the case, the author needs to be included as well. For example: $ git show --format=fuller 5bb689c commit 5bb689ca3f03ab95ed69b78dac7a3263ffd87326 Author: jphillips <jeff.c.phillips@boeing.com> AuthorDate: Fri May 13 13:33:46 2011 -0700 Commit: Ryan D. Brooks <ryan.d.brooks@boeing.com> CommitDate: Fri May 13 13:33:46 2011 -0700 Thanks, Ryan Brooks
Moving to the project dashboards.
By design, Dash is intended to record commits. This is semantically different from recording the bits authored, but I believe that it makes sense to do so. What should the semantics be? If the author is a committer, then the author gets credit. Does the committer get credit as well? Is there some reason why Jeff isn't committing work that he's authored? I have been thinking (Tweeted about it over the weekend) about capturing Author information so that we can use it to generate the contributions section of the IP Log.
(In reply to comment #2) > Is there some reason why Jeff isn't committing work that he's authored? It would be because Jeff isn't a committer and wrote a patch :) In Git, author is separated from committer, which is extremely useful for the IP process imho...
(In reply to comment #3) > (In reply to comment #2) > > Is there some reason why Jeff isn't committing work that he's authored? > > It would be because Jeff isn't a committer and wrote a patch :) As of October 2007, Jeff is a committer. What else have you got, smart guy? > In Git, author is separated from committer, which is extremely useful for the > IP process imho... Agreed. In fact, I think I recall reading that somewhere :-)
Git supports a variety of development workflows through its rich feature set especially the rebase command. When rebase is used, the committer is recorded as the committer who performed the rebase rather than the committer who originally authored and pushed the change. The author continues to be reported as the original code author. I would say that the author's contribution represents the more meaningful portion of the participation in the committer/author distinction. However, I would recommend also counting the committer has having materially participated. When the committer is applying a patch, then he is also performing a review. In the case of a rebase (for which there are a number of scenarios) the committer is performing important administrative functions. It is even conceivable that this work is being done by someone (like a build master) who may not otherwise be making commits.
This bug hasn't had any activity in quite some time. Maybe the problem got resolved, was a duplicate of something else, or became less pressing for some reason - or maybe it's still relevant but just hasn't been looked at yet. If you have further information on the current state of the bug, please add it. The information can be, for example, that the problem still occurs, that you still want the feature, that more information is needed, or that the bug is (for whatever reason) no longer relevant. -- The automated Eclipse Genie.
The new dashboard [1], as well as all of the charts on the project (PMI) pages use the author field to record the source of contributions. We have no plans to update the deprecated (old) dashboard. I think that the intention of this issue has been fully addressed. The letter of it, however, has not been addressed, so I'm going to mark this as WONTFIX. [1] http://dashboard.eclipse.org
