On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 07:04:40PM +0700, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy wrote:

> > With or without "--no-merges", the big picture you can get out of
> > "git shortlog -s -n --since=1.year" does not change very much, but
> > the headline numbers give a wrong impression.
> These numbers are approximate anyway. Commit counts or the number of
> changed lines do not accurately reflect the effort in many cases. And
> about merges, in this particular case of Git where the maintainer imo
> has done an excellent job as a guard, I'd say it's the credit for
> reviewing, not simply merging.

I agree that commit count is approximate. But counting merges is really
quite a large factor of error (in git.git, it more than doubles Junio's
count, and represents over 20% of the total number of commits).

The GitHub contributors page counts merges _and_ fails to use mailmap.
Yuck. I'm working on fixing that now.

> But not using the link is fine too. We can wait for Jeff's patch to be
> merged.

After the discussion in the PR, I am inclined to think the site (and
possibly the manpage) should just point to some decent contributors
graph (either GitHub, ohloh, or something else; suggestions welcome).
Anything else is just recreating a crappy static version of something
that could be much more dynamic and explorable.

I find the ohloh one a little more informative than the GitHub graph. I
couldn't find any others (Google Code does not seem to have one,
kernel.org and other gitweb sites do not, and I can't think of anywhere
else that hosts a mirror).

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to