graphical cset stats

graphical cset stats

[Larry McVoy]

http://www.bitkeeper.com/linux-csets.png

Any better?

Re: graphical cset stats

[Greg KH]

On Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 03:40:09PM -0700, Larry McVoy wrote:
> http://www.bitkeeper.com/linux-csets.png
> 
> Any better?

Very neat stuff, I can hear the managers subscribed to the list panting
for more :)


greg k-h

Re: graphical cset stats

[Daniel Gryniewicz]

But it is interesting how it's an exponential progression.

Daniel

On Tue, 23 Apr 2002 16:25:20 -0700
Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 03:40:09PM -0700, Larry McVoy wrote:
> > http://www.bitkeeper.com/linux-csets.png
> > 
> > Any better?
> 
> Very neat stuff, I can hear the managers subscribed to the list panting
> for more :)
> 
> 
> greg k-h

Re: graphical cset stats

[Linus Torvalds]

In article <20020423203211.7a6d7078.dang@fprintf.net>,
Daniel Gryniewicz  <dang@fprintf.net> wrote:
>
>But it is interesting how it's an exponential progression.

I think it's a bit dangerous, because it is so misleading. Both the "top
performers" are clearly integrators rather than big coders, and I
suspect a lot of my "cset-points" are actually from the early BK tree
creation where every single cset got attributed to me simply because
they got merged from the historic non-SCM patch info.

Certainly looking at the SCM statistics from the last 500 ChangeSets, 63
of them were attributed to me ("Hey, Linus does 12% of all kernel coding
himself! Studly, man!"), but if you actually look at the details of the
changesets, you'll notice that I'm a total loser, and I end up doing
little coding and most of my changesets are merges, cset excludes,
kernel version updates etc ("Hey, Linus is a complete moron!").. 

So I personally get a bit nervous about pretty graphs - they _seem_ to
say so much, yet they clearly don't tell enough.  Which can be a bit
dangerous if somebody takes them too seriously. They're just simple
enough that you think you get the RealTruth(tm).

				Linus

Re: graphical cset stats

[Rusty Russell]

On Wed, 24 Apr 2002 04:18:45 +0000 (UTC)
torvalds@transmeta.com (Linus Torvalds) wrote:

> So I personally get a bit nervous about pretty graphs - they _seem_ to
> say so much, yet they clearly don't tell enough.  Which can be a bit
> dangerous if somebody takes them too seriously. They're just simple
> enough that you think you get the RealTruth(tm).

Shut up Linus!  They're obviously revealing a Deeper Truth.

12th best kernel coder on the planet!  Woohoo!
Rusty.
-- 
   there are those who do and those who hang on and you don't see too
   many doers quoting their contemporaries.  -- Larry McVoy