15 minutes ago, Neil Van Dyke wrote: > > Below is very opinion-heavy seat-of-pants reaction. I'm not > familiar with Ohloh, and I could be off the mark... > > The Ohloh site seems oriented towards PHBs who use 'analysis' like > "decreasing year-over-year development activity" without wondering > whether it's at all accurate and meaningful.
They're pretty good, I think, about showing the caveats. For example, in the code history (and project cost etc) there is a comment that says that often they see only part of the history, which you can see with an initial spike of code. > (Yes, that's what they say about Racket, with a yellow warning > graphic. That's because they count only source code -- and that includes only known languages. (Which is actually a good decision.) This explains the two big drops in code: one was renaming *.ss file (which they recognize as Scheme code) to *.rkt (which they don't know about). And since we're left with very little code that counts, the second drop is probably Matthew's revision of the GUI -- eliminating a ton of C/++ code which was a significant part of the little code that they see. Hopefully they'll get John's patch in which would make things look closer to the reality. > And only 2 people on that site claim to use Racket, which just looks > funny.) Yeah -- but that's just people who bothered creating an account there and declare that they use it... Note that the "plt-scheme" project has 21 users, which should move over once my request for marking it as a duplicate of "racket" goes through. > A quick poll of open source developers I bumped into, including one > loosely connected to Ohloh, said nothing positive about it. > Personally, I would invest a little effort in making Racket look > good on Ohloh now that we're there, since that might serendipitously > come in handy for a PHB someday. But I don't know that I would link > to Ohloh or mention them outside of their own site right now. Too > much like those tacky bogus "Top x% Web Site" awards in the late > '90s. Yes -- they started in a promising way, then it got neglected and bit-rotted as well as internet-rotted away to near extinction. Recently they started working on it again (changed owners or something like that), so maybe it'll catch on. (Both then and now I got there after I've seen a bunch of random mentions.) Another thing that might catch on is masterbranch -- coming from stackexchange: https://www.masterbranch.com/racket-project/497230 But it too is unaware of Racket -- it says: Mainly written in C, make and HTML. A total of 16 developers made 931 commits (I didn't see any way to add a language there though.) -- ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay: http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life! _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
