On Tue, 2015-02-10 at 15:20 +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/).

As Jeremy clarified, this is wrong. I edited the answer to be even more

>  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)

First I want to clarify that git history on
http://activity.openstack.org visualizes commits (merged changes, more
properly) to all branches, not just trunk.

That said, we probably still miss some attribution there because we
count "committers" only by looking at the "author" of a change. If
backports are cherry-picked and therefore retain the author then the new
owner is not *counted* as a new contributor.

I highlight that the scope of Activity Board is not to create vanity
charts but only to highlight trends that are useful to understand the
health of the community. It never had any intention to be precise
because 100% precision is hard.

That said, I'm adding the metrics tag because if there is a way to add
owners of back-ports to the count of contributors to OpenStack that'd be

And if we want to improve the number of contributors to stable release,
we may even create a new panel to show such trend.  Do you agree we need
to look in detail, separately to contributors to stable and to trunk
instead of one blob?


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe

Reply via email to