Hi, I might be wrong, but I don't see our support team CC'ed in the emails lists. So I am CC'ing them to ensure they are aware of this thread.
Thank you very much and best regards, --- Manrique On May 13, 2017 20:01, "Robert Varga" <[email protected]> wrote: > On 11/05/17 21:18, Casey Cain wrote: > > Hello, everyone! > > Hello Casey, > > >> Robert Varga stated: > >> "One thing I have concern about is the company break-down, where my > >> commits are attributed to Cisco only, whereas they should be > >> attributed > >> based on the email address: > >> - [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> -> Cisco > >> - *varga@pantheon* -> Pantheon Technologies > >> - [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> -> unaffiliated > > > > Currently, we support "sequential affiliations" for these cases. Since > > addresses are not usually reliable (eg, people start committing for a > > company with their old personal address), we use dates to determine > > periods of affiliation. If Robert can provide us with the periods of > > affiliation for Cisco, Pantheon Technologies, and unaffiliated, we can > > include that information for his profile. > > I am sorry, that will not work, as the periods are overlapping. I think > the classification rules are simple enough: > > - check against known company emails, if not matched then > - look up in sequential affiliations, if not matched then > - attribute to 'Unknown' > > This will provide accurate results for both cases as long as company > email addresses can be trusted. If that assumption does not hold, I am > afraid we have a larger issue (and a separate topic). > > I also think we should have a separate 'Individual' category, distinct > from 'Unknown'. > > >> The second thing is that pantheon.sk <http://pantheon.sk> and > > pantheon.tech addresses seem > >> to > >> be lumped into the 'Unknown' category -- which is very visible in the > >> topoprocessing repository. > >> What can I do to remedy these?" > > > > Can we assume that we should assign pantheon.sk <http://pantheon.sk> and > > pantheon.tech to > > "Pantheon Technologies"? > > Yes. Furthermore, I think these should be clarified for all member > companies ASAP. > > Regards, > Robert > >
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
