Forums : Feedback Forum
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]
Contributor vs Committer
For some projects, I am only a contributor, not a committer… take for example this commit:
https://www.ohloh.net/projects/pcc/commits/21271617
I did send that in, and gmcgarry committed it on my behalf.
Is there a way to claim these for oneself? I’ve got quite a lot of them spread around various projects, some with some without explicit crediting my name.
Hi Throsten,
No, Ohloh does not yet have the ability to claim individual commits.
There is a lot of discussion around this, and while it won't happen soon it is something that we are looking at for the future.
I wonder what the criteria for automatic detection, such as in (a), are, and what is the difference to (b), which is not auto-detected.
a) https://www.ohloh.net/projects/perl/commits/22428885
b) https://www.ohloh.net/projects/xfree86/commits/23280979
Hi Thorsten... I'm afraid I don't understand your question. What do you mean by automatic detection
? I'm not sure what difference between a and b you are referring to.
Ah.
Well, I submitted both a and b to the respective projects, and they were committed by a developer with commit access, not by me. Both commit messages mention my name.
However, while a is attributed to me, b is not.
Now, where is the difference, or, what made the code scanner recognise that a is mine? If people knew that, they could cope with the system by formatting log messages appropriately or something.
Interestingly enough, a (and some GNU Libtool commits) were attributed to me before I even joined this site.
Ah, OK, this is actually pretty easy to explain.
A great feature of Git is that it has separate fields to record both the committer's name and the original author's name. This means that even if you didn't create the actual commit yourself, the Git repository preserves your name as the original author.
CVS and Subversion of course don't have a dedicated place to store the original author's name, which leads to an explosion of various methods of putting author names into the comment field. Ohloh doesn't try to parse author names out of comment fields. Every project has its own way of doing this, and many committers are inconsistent when adding this information.
Ah, okay. I never used git, so I could not imagine. Thanks for clearing up. Sad, though.
Putting RFC822-style e-mail headers in commit messages to have this information is one practice I've seen in at least two places already.
