> > > Secondly, it's difficult to get stack-analytics credit for back > > ports, as the preferred method is to cherry pick the code, and > > that keeps the original author's name. I've personally gotten a > > few commits into stable, but have nothing to show for it in > > stack-analytics (if I'm doing it wrong, I'm happy to be > > corrected). > [...] > Stackalytics isn't an official OpenStack project, but you should > file a bug[2] against it if there's a feature you want its authors > to consider adding.
Stackalytics tracks commits into stable branches, e.g. for Neutron stable/juno they are visible at http://stackalytics.com/?metric=commits&module=neutron&release=juno. Commits are also shown in activity log for specific project or person, so if someone interested in pulling them into weekly report - they will be there. Thanks, Ilya 2015-02-10 19:45 GMT+03:00 Jeremy Stanley <fu...@yuggoth.org>: > On 2015-02-10 15:20:46 +0000 (+0000), Kevin Bringard (kevinbri) wrote: > [...] > > I've been talking with a few people about this very thing lately, > > and I think much of it is caused by what appears to be our > > actively discouraging people from working on it. Most notably, ATC > > is only being given to folks committing to the current branch > > ( > https://ask.openstack.org/en/question/45531/atc-pass-for-the-openstack-summit/ > ). > > The comments on that answer are somewhat misleading, so I'll follow > up there as well to set the record straight. The script[1] which > identifies ATCs for the purpose of technical elections and summit > passes is based entirely on Gerrit owners (uploaders) of changes > merged to official projects within a particular time period. It > doesn't treat master differently from any other branches. People who > do the work to upload backports to stable branches absolutely do get > counted for this purpose. People who only review changes uploaded by > others do not (unless they are manually added to the "extra-atcs" > file in the openstack/governance repo), but that is the case for all > branches including master so not something stable-branch specific. > > Though I *personally* hope that is not the driving force to convince > people to work on stable support. If it is, then we've already lost > on this front. > > > Secondly, it's difficult to get stack-analytics credit for back > > ports, as the preferred method is to cherry pick the code, and > > that keeps the original author's name. I've personally gotten a > > few commits into stable, but have nothing to show for it in > > stack-analytics (if I'm doing it wrong, I'm happy to be > > corrected). > [...] > > Stackalytics isn't an official OpenStack project, but you should > file a bug[2] against it if there's a feature you want its authors > to consider adding. > > [1] > https://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack-infra/system-config/tree/tools/atc/email_stats.py > [2] https://bugs.launchpad.net/stackalytics/+filebug > -- > Jeremy Stanley > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev