Dear Open Hub Users,
We’re excited to announce that we will be moving the Open Hub Forum to
https://community.synopsys.com/s/black-duck-open-hub.
Beginning immediately, users can head over,
register,
get technical help and discuss issue pertinent to the Open Hub. Registered users can also subscribe to Open Hub announcements here.
On May 1, 2020, we will be freezing https://www.openhub.net/forums and users will not be able to create new discussions. If you have any questions and concerns, please email us at
[email protected]
Hi, I'm a project leader for a project listed here on ohloh called stendhal (it's an rpg). http://www.ohloh.net/projects/stendhal
I notice that a couple of people have added themself as contributors who have never made commits. i don't even recognise the names as stendhal players (which i guess you could loosely argue is a contribution since it's beta testing?) nor do i recognise them from bug reports, feature requests or chat...
so, what do people think about anyone just being allowed to claim to be a contributor? and do you think project leaders/admin should be allowed to edit the list?
I wouldn't object, myself, if they just added stendhal to their stack and said they used it. or wrote a review. but please don't allow people to dilute our contributor efforts by falsely adding themself. i might not even mind if they had a note next to their name explaining how they contributed (just like some of ours have put developer, artist, etc)
so, any thoughts?
The problem with allowing admins to edit the list is how we know that admins are who they claim they are...
Hi kymara,
I don't believe that just anyone should be allowed to claim to be a contributor, and I think that project admins should be able to monitor the list of commit-less contributors.
We added the ability to make arbitrary claims to compensate for limitations in our source control crawler -- there are some kinds of commits we just can't track. Also, there are a lot of valid contributors who simply don't have commit access. So there's a need for the feature, but there also needs to be some enforcement.
It's optional for a commit-less contributor to provide some description of the contribution, but we don't mandate it. Perhaps that should change.
We are going to be adding an admin
feature to Ohloh very soon. This will allow one or more verified contributors to declare themselves to be project administrators. Certain Ohloh features will only be available to the admins, and we will likely add the ability to lock down certain parts of the Ohloh project page.
We haven't yet discussed policing the contribution claims, but that seems a reasonable thing for admins to do.
So that is the general direction we are taking, even though it might take a while for these features to see the light of day.
We'd welcome any ideas folks have about this.
Also, if you have a case of contributor abuse you want investigated or removed, let us know and we can look into it.
Robin
-there are some kinds of commits we just can't track
yes, I noticed that images for example don't get counted by ohloh, and a lot of contributions to our project are graphical. But I don't think any of our contributors have committed solely graphics, so they just look like they've done less than they have because only the code is counted.
-It's optional for a commit-less contributor to provide some description of the contribution, but we don't mandate it. Perhaps that should change.
Yes, that sounds like a fair compromise.
I don't know if the small number of bogus claims on our project would count as abuse. I only notice them, wonder about them, and notice that it then looks like our X lines of code are written by N people when in fact it's N-2, or whatever. Thanks for the offer to help if and when we need it. I've always felt ohloh is very good for that. Thanks also for putting in such a considered response to my post.
Anyone can just claim whatever they want it seems.
http://www.ohloh.net/accounts/SoIntoYou claimed commits made by Brion Vibber in project Mediawiki :
http://www.ohloh.net/projects/mediawiki/contributors/94489303233
I think he has claimed on a few projects.....
he has a lot of cross project same time commits which is odd
Yeah, he's a real barrel of laughs. I'm cleaning it up now.
Reflection on this makes me think that what we need is a special code embedded in a comment. Something like:
ohlohuserid userid email diresuholho
Avoiding non-alphabetics reduces the chances that a this will cause problems in the diverse languages we parse.
That could be used to indicate that the version control user was tied to . It's tempting it limit it to commits by , but this breaks in-active participants and mass-attribution efforts.
Hi Stuart,
Yes, we've thought about introducing a confirmed
state in Ohloh, which would require you to add some kind of Ohloh-specific key into the code or the commit log.
We decided to hold off on the feature for a lot of reasons. So far, there haven't been too many disputes related to code claims, so we haven't needed it.
knocks on wood