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 <[email protected]> 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 > >
