From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [RFC] Use cases for 'git statistics' Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 10:30:20 -0700 Message-ID: <7vprrf4lar.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <200805121440.12836.jnareb@gmail.com> <200805131507.04912.jnareb@gmail.com> <7vlk29er1w.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "Jakub Narebski" , git@vger.kernel.org To: "Sverre Rabbelier" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed May 21 19:31:48 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JysA9-0006Oj-Jy for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 21 May 2008 19:31:42 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933638AbYEURag (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 May 2008 13:30:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932348AbYEURaf (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 May 2008 13:30:35 -0400 Received: from a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([207.106.133.19]:40280 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933638AbYEURae (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 May 2008 13:30:34 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1D436B59; Wed, 21 May 2008 13:30:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-77.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 405716B52; Wed, 21 May 2008 13:30:24 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <7vlk29er1w.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Fri, 16 May 2008 17:02:19 -0700") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 9B2ADB16-275B-11DD-B5B2-80001473D85F-77302942!a-sasl-fastnet.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Junio C Hamano writes: > "Sverre Rabbelier" writes: > >>> >> Details I think need to be provided by maintainer... >>> > >>> > Do you mean Junio, or the user of the program? >>> >>> I mean that all I can provide is speculation. I'm not, and never was >>> a maintainer of OSS project, and I don't know what criteria one use >>> (perhaps unvoiced criteria) to decide whether given patch needs to be >>> examined more closely, or the cursory browsing should be enough. >> >> I reckon more input from actual maintainers would be needed then. >> Junio: aside from the original list with suggestions you provided, >> could you shine your light as git maintainer on this? > ... > Project maintainers and old timers become familiar with habits, strengths > and weaknesses of known contributors over time, and that is the source of > such trust. I just realized another thing about "the source of trust". The "statistics" would count _only_ what gets accepted, but maintainers and list participants have much richer set of datapoints to judge the strengths and weaknesses of contributors --- rejects. An early round of contribution from somebody needs deeper review if the contributor has a history of taking many rounds of refinements to get a rather trivial change into an acceptable shape. IOW, over time people can learn who are meticulous and who are careless from rejection counts, which is not recorded in the committed history.