Cool.
> On 30 Apr 2015, at 16:18, Andrei Chis <chisvasileand...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Of course :) > Just right now we are too busy with releasing moose 5.1 and moving > development to Pharo 5. > After it's done we can sync more on this. > > Cheers, > Andrei > > On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 4:15 PM, Yuriy Tymchuk <yuriy.tymc...@me.com > <mailto:yuriy.tymc...@me.com>> wrote: > Ok, then an important question: is any author of a reporting tool ready to > help other 2 authors to migrate to his tool? > > Uko > > > >> On 30 Apr 2015, at 16:10, stepharo <steph...@free.fr >> <mailto:steph...@free.fr>> wrote: >> >> >> One is also easier to improve/maintain. >> Stef >> >> >> Le 28/4/15 14:31, Andrei Chis a écrit : >>> Yes, some level of unification would be nice, especially for the part about >>> users agreeing to send usage data and persisting that setting. >>> Also at least two general levels of details about what data is being send >>> that tools should follow would help (full anonymous vs. include class >>> names/method names ?). >>> Last but not least, a single entry point for sending that data over the >>> network would help. >>> >>> How data is collected/stored will differ from tool to tool, but agreeing on >>> the previous aspects would make it much easier to collect data. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Andrei >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 1:18 PM, Marcus Denker <marcus.den...@inria.fr >>> <mailto:marcus.den...@inria.fr>> wrote: >>> >>> > On 28 Apr 2015, at 11:42, Yuriy Tymchuk <yuriy.tymc...@me.com >>> > <mailto:yuriy.tymc...@me.com>> wrote: >>> > >>> > Hi guys, >>> > >>> > from time to time we have to collect a usage data in order to improve our >>> > tools. For example I’d like to collect data in future about how do you >>> > treat code critics: do they occur, do you outfox them, do you mark them >>> > as false positives? If we had answers to these questions, we could really >>> > make good and helpful critics. >>> > >>> > For now I know that there are 3 projects which collect data: >>> > - GTSpotter >>> > - Shoreline >>> > - DFlow (not in image by default). >>> > >>> > Should I make 4th data collection for QualityAssistant? Or maybe we can >>> > do some unification? >>> > >>> >>> I would love unification! >>> >>> It’s not only good for the researchers, but even for the user: I do not >>> want to decide 5 times to give data to research, >>> but I want to decide it once… >>> >>> Marcus >>> >>> >>> >> > >
