Re: [PHP-DOC] I have uptodate commiter stats
I certainly wouldn't object to that, and there are a number of people, the phpdoc "regulars", that would get my vote to become the phpdoc equivalent of the PHP group, and be listed there in phpcredits(), but that is different from being "just" an author of the documentation and being credited as such. Agreed. Maybe one solution is to credit everybody (even the single committer from 1998) in the manual, but list the "PHP Doc Group" in phpcredits(). Those people would be only be active people steering the documentation project, similar to the PHP Group. This way we wouldn't need to worry about the "Alexander Aulbachs" of the world, but properly can still highlight the big contributions of the team of folks who are really helping out with today's manual. Because I do think it's only fair that these guys get the proper credit for their work. I agree with this. The php-gtk manual is an example where the "main" authors are listed with an et al linking to a list. It's on a smaller scale (just two) but we would do it for all. The master list (that lists everyone) could be located at the new docs.php.net site. Or, put it somewhere in the manual although this is a long list! We should also list extension specific authors as such. For example Georg is mysql/mysqli master. I think it'd be nice if we had more of these, like someone to take over sockets. Don't you see I have done/proposed this already? I have proposed a list of names which I think contitutes most of the currently active people to be on the front page (replacing the current list) and already added the "et al link", which points to the page which explains who else provided more helpful contributions to the community. The only difference here is that I have not proposed a listing of *ALL* people who contributed on the big contributions page either. But if you think it is better, I can live with it. BTW I have not proposed to give a magic name to those on the frontpage, like "PHP Documentation Group" (after the PHP Group as you suggest), because it would elevate those people too much IMHO. I am trying to find a fair balance of elevating some people, but not doing it too much. This is part of my conspiration to not put that list into concrete, but present it more like a flexible group, which is to expand and shrink as time goes by (unlike the PHP Group). I think this better represents the desire to fairly credit the defining group of the documentation adjusted from time to time. Goba
Re: [PHP-DOC] I have uptodate commiter stats
If we list all people, do we list editors on the frontpage (exactly like PEARdoc does)? Who are editors? They need to be picked by hand, no? If we list all people, who we list on the phpcredits() page? Noone? All people do not fit there. Then credit them as a "cast of hundreds" and make it link to the list in the back of the manual. My point is that it is a waste of time trying to track down just "how much" to credit someone; everyone that contributed, contributed. If you really want to rank them, do it in reverse order of commits, but you should still list them all. Authors of user notes sometimes contribute a lot more than those we have tracks of in CVS. We just integrate user notes without giving credit to their authors. It is just not possible to list everybody. Big chunks of the manual are based on user notes. Even if we say now we add the author tags to sections based on first commits, it will turn out that quite a few of those commits are actually user note integrations. They make up the small list which we can put into phpcredits(). Ah, now I see the motivation. It's a tricky proposition. There is no fair way really to credit without crediting all involved parties, IMO, and that would be too long a list. Right, this is our problem. If you look at the phpcredits() output, you see some names picked out of those who contributed to the PHP project. You know more people contributed to those extensions, APIs, etc, but you still have some names picked out on the phpcredits() page as *most important people*. Now I don't see if all the PHP source code crediting system is based on this picking, then why this is a problem for the PHP documentation to be based on a similar system? Anyway, I don't have particularly strong feelings about what does or does not happen, I just wanted to point out that I don't think ranking based on an arbitrary cut-off point in CVS commits is really all that fair (for instance: one person documents a new extension in great detail and commits it but doesn't get higher than the bottom of the list; is it fair on them to not be credited?), and can't see a practical fair solution short of listing everyone that contributed. I have provided the raw commit list as a base and already made three exceptions (listed Hartmut as a previous author, but said I would not grant two of those in the top list "top author" credit). Plus we are going to make an exception with Youni too, since he has not reached the commit limit I have proposed. I have also said I have no problems with more exceptions, actually I have started this discussion to make exceptions. Goba
Re: [PHP-DOC] I have uptodate commiter stats
i'm pretty sure that i have commited more that 9 times to php, not that i care too much;-) Check yourself on bonsai. Here is you "all time commits" list for phpdoc: http://bonsai.php.net/cvsquery.cgi?treeid=default&module=phpdoc&branch=HEAD&branchtype=match&dir=&file=&filetype=match&who=thies&whotype=match&sortby=Date&hours=2&date=all&mindate=&maxdate=&cvsroot=%2Frepository It is exactly nine commits. If you believe Bonsai. Unfortunately Bonsai has gaps. Big gaps. For example, if you believe bonsai you'd swear I hadn't touched phpdoc since Feb 2004. (And that ain't true) Well, Thies havent touched it since then. Both cvsanaly (my local setup) and bonsai (bonsai.php.net) report that he has 9 commits. True, bonsai is not suitable to check for those with recent contributions, but Thies has no recent contribution I know of. Goba
Re: [PHP-DOC] I have uptodate commiter stats
I am +1 to list better more people than less. I don't think all 227 commiters should be necessarily printed but "100 commits" limit is too much. I can recognize people with more than about 50 commits overall and more then about 10 commits in last half year. This list can be sorted by number of commits or not. And I think that "Authors" isn't appropriate name for this list, better is "Contributors". I don't feel like an author of PHP Documentation even if I made 641 commits (by Goba's list). Goba, thanks for moving things forward. Jakub Vrana
Re: [PHP-DOC] I have uptodate commiter stats
> > > I don't see why the "PHP Documentation Team" > > > section on phpinfo() can't be similarly selected by some magical > > > community agreement. > > > > I certainly wouldn't object to that, and there are a number of people, > > the phpdoc "regulars", that would get my vote to become the phpdoc > > equivalent of the PHP group, and be listed there in phpcredits(), but > > that is different from being "just" an author of the documentation and > > being credited as such. > > Agreed. Maybe one solution is to credit everybody (even the single > committer from 1998) in the manual, but list the "PHP Doc Group" in > phpcredits(). > > Those people would be only be active people steering the documentation > project, similar to the PHP Group. This way we wouldn't need to worry > about the "Alexander Aulbachs" of the world, but properly can still > highlight the big contributions of the team of folks who are really > helping out with today's manual. > > Because I do think it's only fair that these guys get the proper > credit for their work. I agree with this. The php-gtk manual is an example where the "main" authors are listed with an et al linking to a list. It's on a smaller scale (just two) but we would do it for all. The master list (that lists everyone) could be located at the new docs.php.net site. Or, put it somewhere in the manual although this is a long list! We should also list extension specific authors as such. For example Georg is mysql/mysqli master. I think it'd be nice if we had more of these, like someone to take over sockets. Regards, Philip
Re: [PHP-DOC] I have uptodate commiter stats
On Mon, 19 Jul 2004, Wez Furlong wrote: > > I don't see why the "PHP Documentation Team" > > section on phpinfo() can't be similarly selected by some magical > > community agreement. > > I certainly wouldn't object to that, and there are a number of people, > the phpdoc "regulars", that would get my vote to become the phpdoc > equivalent of the PHP group, and be listed there in phpcredits(), but > that is different from being "just" an author of the documentation and > being credited as such. Agreed. Maybe one solution is to credit everybody (even the single committer from 1998) in the manual, but list the "PHP Doc Group" in phpcredits(). Those people would be only be active people steering the documentation project, similar to the PHP Group. This way we wouldn't need to worry about the "Alexander Aulbachs" of the world, but properly can still highlight the big contributions of the team of folks who are really helping out with today's manual. Because I do think it's only fair that these guys get the proper credit for their work. -adam -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] author of o'reilly's "upgrading to php 5" and "php cookbook" avoid the holiday rush, buy your copies today!
Re: [PHP-DOC] I have uptodate commiter stats
On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 18:10:59 -0400 (EDT), Adam Maccabee Trachtenberg > We have a "PHP Group" that we somehow manage to determine from our > list of contributors. Ah, but that's different thing; the PHP Group isn't (necessarily) comprised of people writing PHP, instead it's more of a group of people steering PHP. > I don't see why the "PHP Documentation Team" > section on phpinfo() can't be similarly selected by some magical > community agreement. I certainly wouldn't object to that, and there are a number of people, the phpdoc "regulars", that would get my vote to become the phpdoc equivalent of the PHP group, and be listed there in phpcredits(), but that is different from being "just" an author of the documentation and being credited as such. --Wez.
Re: [PHP-DOC] I have uptodate commiter stats
On Mon, 19 Jul 2004, Wez Furlong wrote: > > They make up the small list which we can put into > > phpcredits(). > > Ah, now I see the motivation. It's a tricky proposition. > There is no fair way really to credit without crediting all involved > parties, IMO, and that would be too long a list. We have a "PHP Group" that we somehow manage to determine from our list of contributors. I don't see why the "PHP Documentation Team" section on phpinfo() can't be similarly selected by some magical community agreement. FWIW, I fall in the category of "have made some phpdoc cvs commits, but have made so few that I would miss the current cutoff." While I would be happy to find my name in the manual, I don't really expect it because my contribution is so much smaller than the people who I feel are actively contributing to the documentation effort. -adam -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] author of o'reilly's "upgrading to php 5" and "php cookbook" avoid the holiday rush, buy your copies today!
Re: [PHP-DOC] I have uptodate commiter stats
Wez, An alphabetical list most likely would work better, considering various other places use alphabetical lists by surname, firstname. Regards --jm
Re: [PHP-DOC] I have uptodate commiter stats
> We have gone through this conversation several times. All people means > even people with one commit? Yes, because that one commit is a contribution. Sure, people make mistakes, but so what, really? > If we list all people, do we list editors > on the frontpage (exactly like PEARdoc does)? Who are editors? They need > to be picked by hand, no? If we list all people, who we list on the > phpcredits() page? Noone? All people do not fit there. Then credit them as a "cast of hundreds" and make it link to the list in the back of the manual. My point is that it is a waste of time trying to track down just "how much" to credit someone; everyone that contributed, contributed. If you really want to rank them, do it in reverse order of commits, but you should still list them all. > The idea of crediting current authors a bit more is to encourage them to > stay here. And having your name among the 200 or so people in the world that contributed to what is probably one of the most widely spread pieces of online documentation isn't enough? :-) I think it is a testament to the PHP manual that so many have contributed to make it what it is, why not list them all? > They make up the small list which we can put into > phpcredits(). Ah, now I see the motivation. It's a tricky proposition. There is no fair way really to credit without crediting all involved parties, IMO, and that would be too long a list. > If we go with the long list, current contributors will not > get more credit then those whose content was probably replaced or > overedited by the currently active team. What I don't like about that sentence is "get more credit" and "probably replaced". Anyway, I don't have particularly strong feelings about what does or does not happen, I just wanted to point out that I don't think ranking based on an arbitrary cut-off point in CVS commits is really all that fair (for instance: one person documents a new extension in great detail and commits it but doesn't get higher than the bottom of the list; is it fair on them to not be credited?), and can't see a practical fair solution short of listing everyone that contributed. So, having given my opinion, I'll withdraw and let you get on ;-) --Wez.
Re: [PHP-DOC] I have uptodate commiter stats
Hi all, > * Thus wrote Dave: > > On Monday, July 19, 2004, 11:47:40 AM, Philip wrote: > > > I thought we were going to scrap this whole "raw number of > > > commits" thing in favor of individual credits per page. Or > > > will both be used? In the very least I thought we agreed > > > to never use raw numbers and to be an author you must > > > prove it yourself. Quality versus Quantity. Show me the > > > money! Computers dumb, humans smart. User note editors is > > > one thing but being an author of the PHP manual? It just > > > doesn't feel right but maybe that's because I'm not an > > > author ;) > > > >... > > > > Also, a "commit" doesn't make you an "author" either. As Gabor noted, > > I've mostly done search and replaces, fixing thousands of typos and > > grammatical mistakes. The only real content I've added is writing all > > the GMP function examples. I don't consider myself fitting into the > > "author" category here, maybe the crazy-pedantic-proofreader/editor > > category? > > Although my opinion is rather skewed, I tend to agree with this. If > I can devot some more time to the completion of the oop5 docs, > would that be more of a contribution than 100 typo fixes? > > Perhaps a move to more of a author per section? The only reason > being is that If I take any credit, it shouldn't be for the whole > documentation, since I've only contributed mostly to the oop5 > docs, which is only a small portion of the whole with documentation. I am also not a big fan of raw commit numbers, but I tend to say, that people with more commits most likely contribute also 'valuable' content to the documentation. AFAIRC we also discussed per section author, nice idea, but not very practical. Can be based on the first commit of a section, but say five people modify the contents textual, who is the author of the section? As long as nobody has a pratical solution for credits beside that raw number thing, stay with the raw numbers. Prevents nobody from claiming to be an author/editor/other contributor. etc. ;-) Ask yourself ;-) what does qualify someone as author/editor..? Are 100 typo fixes more important as new sections? Is one huge commit of section/extension docs more than 100 small fixes to existing docs? I can't decide and I don't want to have to do ;-) nor can I present a solution for crediting. IMHO we should not tend to make things too complicated. Crediting is a long outstanding todo and Goba has done some nice work about. Just let it happen ;-) it must not stay forever, but is definitly better than nothing. Friedhelm
RE: [PHP-DOC] I have uptodate commiter stats
.. > > http://goba.hu/commiters.html (beware 376 Kbyte html file!) > > Additionaly to this, here is the data of how many commits people had in > the last half year (since january 1 actually) (with only those CVS > accounts who had at least one commit). > > I propose we put a line above baoengb and add the people above it to the > frontpage authors list (this is nearly the same as the magic 100 mark we > use). I exclude baoengb here, because I know he achieved this high > commit number mostly by adding translated stuff to the EN tree, and then .. Yes, I had made several mistakes in the EN tree, and that was reverted by other people. (that errors could mean about 30 commits), of course I'm not dealing to find my name between such top people, I just try to do my best. of course my work is mainly in the ES tree, and my (correct) committing is for errors I have found. May be I can be helpful enough in a later stage. that made me realize that I have to much to learn. Greetings baoengbDo You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Net: La mejor conexión a internet y 25MB extra a tu correo por $100 al mes.
Re: [PHP-DOC] I have uptodate commiter stats
> > i'm pretty sure that i have commited more that 9 times to php, not > > that i care too much;-) > > Check yourself on bonsai. Here is you "all time commits" list for phpdoc: > > http://bonsai.php.net/cvsquery.cgi?treeid=default&module=phpdoc&branch=HEAD&branchtype=match&dir=&file=&filetype=match&who=thies&whotype=match&sortby=Date&hours=2&date=all&mindate=&maxdate=&cvsroot=%2Frepository > > It is exactly nine commits. > If you believe Bonsai. Unfortunately Bonsai has gaps. Big gaps. For example, if you believe bonsai you'd swear I hadn't touched phpdoc since Feb 2004. (And that ain't true)
Re: [PHP-DOC] I have uptodate commiter stats
Why not just stick a big list of all contributors in there for now, and work towards crediting per page? Seems like a sensible balance between overall fairness and overall work; why expend huge effort on the credits section when there is plenty of other stuff to be getting on with. I don't think any kind of filtering on the list of committers will lead to satisfactory results without someone to audit everything ever done by everyone (just MHO), so I see it as a maintainance task with no real benefits compared to listing all people (you already have the list). We have gone through this conversation several times. All people means even people with one commit? If we list all people, do we list editors on the frontpage (exactly like PEARdoc does)? Who are editors? They need to be picked by hand, no? If we list all people, who we list on the phpcredits() page? Noone? All people do not fit there. The idea of crediting current authors a bit more is to encourage them to stay here. They make up the small list which we can put into phpcredits(). If we go with the long list, current contributors will not get more credit then those whose content was probably replaced or overedited by the currently active team. Goba
Re: [PHP-DOC] I have uptodate commiter stats
Why not just stick a big list of all contributors in there for now, and work towards crediting per page? Seems like a sensible balance between overall fairness and overall work; why expend huge effort on the credits section when there is plenty of other stuff to be getting on with. I don't think any kind of filtering on the list of committers will lead to satisfactory results without someone to audit everything ever done by everyone (just MHO), so I see it as a maintainance task with no real benefits compared to listing all people (you already have the list). --Wez. On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 20:47:54 +, Gabor Hojtsy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Wez, Dave, Philip, and others, > > The idea behind generating an author list to start with was to get > somewhere forward in the process. As I have said I have provided a list > for discussion. And as I have also said, - apart from two people - the > current "top list" contains names I think the community recognize and > see their contributions as valuable ones. I have also said the list is > open for additions, so "the number mark" was just some guiding piece to > start the discussion, it is actually not some hard stuff I would like to > stick to. > > Sure it would be nicer to credit people by section. BUT to make that > possible, we need to start collecting per section credit names and need > to fill in holes in the system (credit previous work). This is obviously > more work then we are currently able to handle, given that we have > enough stuff with the install part, oop5 section and stuff. We would > also need to have our rendering systems adopted to such a crediting > scheme. DSSSL, XSLT and livedocs all need more work on them to support > this as far as I see, since we use all of these methods currently > (DSSSL, XSLT), or we are going to use them (livedocs) in the future. > > The current situation (years old list of currently inactive authors, and > no credit for current hard workers) is not something that should be > kept. The ideal situation is not something we have volunteers to do. Now > what can we choose? An intermediate solution. This is what I have > offered. I have presented a list for discussion. Now I think it is a lot > easier to produce a list which is much better then the current situation > and will fit (with continual review) until someone volunteers to build > the base for the more fair solution we decided to use on the long run. > > Or do you think it is better to stick to a conceptually better solution > which noone seems to volunteer to build in a reasonble timeframe? Is it > better to direct any people to work on such a supporting system instead > of directing them to fix docbugs or to work on the oop5 section, or > elsewhere? > > Goba >
Re: [PHP-DOC] I have uptodate commiter stats
Wez, Dave, Philip, and others, The idea behind generating an author list to start with was to get somewhere forward in the process. As I have said I have provided a list for discussion. And as I have also said, - apart from two people - the current "top list" contains names I think the community recognize and see their contributions as valuable ones. I have also said the list is open for additions, so "the number mark" was just some guiding piece to start the discussion, it is actually not some hard stuff I would like to stick to. Sure it would be nicer to credit people by section. BUT to make that possible, we need to start collecting per section credit names and need to fill in holes in the system (credit previous work). This is obviously more work then we are currently able to handle, given that we have enough stuff with the install part, oop5 section and stuff. We would also need to have our rendering systems adopted to such a crediting scheme. DSSSL, XSLT and livedocs all need more work on them to support this as far as I see, since we use all of these methods currently (DSSSL, XSLT), or we are going to use them (livedocs) in the future. The current situation (years old list of currently inactive authors, and no credit for current hard workers) is not something that should be kept. The ideal situation is not something we have volunteers to do. Now what can we choose? An intermediate solution. This is what I have offered. I have presented a list for discussion. Now I think it is a lot easier to produce a list which is much better then the current situation and will fit (with continual review) until someone volunteers to build the base for the more fair solution we decided to use on the long run. Or do you think it is better to stick to a conceptually better solution which noone seems to volunteer to build in a reasonble timeframe? Is it better to direct any people to work on such a supporting system instead of directing them to fix docbugs or to work on the oop5 section, or elsewhere? Goba
Re: [PHP-DOC] I have uptodate commiter stats
Hi Thies, i'm pretty sure that i have commited more that 9 times to php, not that i care too much;-) Check yourself on bonsai. Here is you "all time commits" list for phpdoc: http://bonsai.php.net/cvsquery.cgi?treeid=default&module=phpdoc&branch=HEAD&branchtype=match&dir=&file=&filetype=match&who=thies&whotype=match&sortby=Date&hours=2&date=all&mindate=&maxdate=&cvsroot=%2Frepository It is exactly nine commits. Goba
Re: [PHP-DOC] I have uptodate commiter stats
hey goba - i'm pretty sure that i have commited more that 9 times to php, not that i care too much;-) thies
Re: [PHP-DOC] I have uptodate commiter stats
Does anyone know where one can get a copy of the bonsai data? Regards --jm On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 01:47:40 + (GMT), Philip Olson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I thought we were going to scrap this whole "raw number of > commits" thing in favor of individual credits per page. Or > will both be used? In the very least I thought we agreed > to never use raw numbers and to be an author you must > prove it yourself. Quality versus Quantity. Show me the > money! Computers dumb, humans smart. User note editors is > one thing but being an author of the PHP manual? It just > doesn't feel right but maybe that's because I'm not an > author ;) > > Someone needs to fix Bonsai so we can actually view these > commits. > > Regards, > Philip > > > > > On Sun, 18 Jul 2004, Gabor Hojtsy wrote: > > > > http://goba.hu/commiters.html (beware 376 Kbyte html file!) > > > > Additionaly to this, here is the data of how many commits people had in > > the last half year (since january 1 actually) (with only those CVS > > accounts who had at least one commit). > > > > I propose we put a line above baoengb and add the people above it to the > > frontpage authors list (this is nearly the same as the magic 100 mark we > > use). I exclude baoengb here, because I know he achieved this high > > commit number mostly by adding translated stuff to the EN tree, and then > > reverting (multiple times AFAIR). Others are mostly respected people > > here AFAIK, and they deserve to be listed as top authors. Dave is > > someone to think about a bit, as he mostly achieved a top commiter > > rating by mass fixing small mistakes (html->HTML, php->PHP, PHP3->PHP 3, > > and such). > > > > Still I keep suggesting that the historical author list should contain > > people above the 100 commit mark from the list presented at the URL > > above (with a bit of human correction if needed). > > > > Funny that I am just above the line :)) > > > > OK, now provide your suggestions! > > > > +---+--+ > > | didou | 1291 | - Mehdi Achour > > | nlopess | 573 | - Nuno Lopes > > | georg | 245 | - Georg Richter > > | betz | 244 | - Friedhelm Betz > > | tony2001 | 243 | - Antony Dovgal > > | dave | 233 | - Dave (? - mostly done search&replace) > > | vrana | 219 | - Jakub Vrana > > | dams | 194 | - Damien Seguy > > | irchtml | 189 | - Kenneth Schwartz > > | goba | 172 | - Gabor Hojtsy > > > > +===+==+ (suggested crediting mark) > > > > | baoengb | 106 | > > | wez | 64 | > > |derick | 58 | > > | moriyoshi | 44 | > > |mg | 41 | > > | pollita | 37 | > > | progcom | 34 | > > | vincent | 31 | > > |kennyt | 28 | > > |et | 26 | > > | yannick | 21 | > > |philip | 19 | > > | derek | 18 | > > | hholzgra | 14 | > > | sean | 13 | > > | dickmeiss | 11 | > > | ali |8 | > > | abies |6 | > > | jan |5 | > > | thetaphi |4 | > > | samesch |4 | > > | helly |4 | > > | gui |4 | > > | vlad |4 | > > | curt |3 | > > |mj |3 | > > | stas |3 | > > | cucinato |3 | > > |andrei |3 | > > | alindeman |3 | > > | jdonagher |2 | > > | hirokawa |2 | > > | joey |2 | > > |leszek |2 | > > | conni |1 | > > | poz |1 | > > |ae |1 | > > |rasmus |1 | > > | amt |1 | > > | hakan |1 | > > |rioter |1 | > > |nathan |1 | > > | jsjohnst |1 | > > | cece |1 | > > |sp |1 | > > +---+--+ > > > -- http://www.powertrip.co.za/blog/
Re: [PHP-DOC] I have uptodate commiter stats
Hmm, isn't it better to credit the major authors per page/section? It seems somewhat arbitrary to say "the most commits in the last year gets you on the front page". What if your contributions are good enough to remain the same over several years; does your name drift out of the manual? What if you're the author of a popular section of the manual, but never touched anything else? What of people that make large contributions to a small section? Are they fairly represented? To me, it seems fairest to credit authors per page, and have a complete list of all contributors (no matter how small) in the front (or the back; there are nearly 300 people in your list). If you must, you can list those in descending order of "commit counts", but alphabetical seems fair to me. --Wez. On Sun, 18 Jul 2004 14:37:52 +, Gabor Hojtsy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > http://goba.hu/commiters.html (beware 376 Kbyte html file!) > > Additionaly to this, here is the data of how many commits people had in > the last half year (since january 1 actually) (with only those CVS > accounts who had at least one commit). > > I propose we put a line above baoengb and add the people above it to the > frontpage authors list (this is nearly the same as the magic 100 mark we > use). I exclude baoengb here, because I know he achieved this high > commit number mostly by adding translated stuff to the EN tree, and then > reverting (multiple times AFAIR). Others are mostly respected people > here AFAIK, and they deserve to be listed as top authors. Dave is > someone to think about a bit, as he mostly achieved a top commiter > rating by mass fixing small mistakes (html->HTML, php->PHP, PHP3->PHP 3, > and such). > > Still I keep suggesting that the historical author list should contain > people above the 100 commit mark from the list presented at the URL > above (with a bit of human correction if needed). > > Funny that I am just above the line :)) > > OK, now provide your suggestions! > > +---+--+ > | didou | 1291 | - Mehdi Achour > | nlopess | 573 | - Nuno Lopes > | georg | 245 | - Georg Richter > | betz | 244 | - Friedhelm Betz > | tony2001 | 243 | - Antony Dovgal > | dave | 233 | - Dave (? - mostly done search&replace) > | vrana | 219 | - Jakub Vrana > | dams | 194 | - Damien Seguy > | irchtml | 189 | - Kenneth Schwartz > | goba | 172 | - Gabor Hojtsy > > +===+==+ (suggested crediting mark) > > | baoengb | 106 | > | wez | 64 | > |derick | 58 | > | moriyoshi | 44 | > |mg | 41 | > | pollita | 37 | > | progcom | 34 | > | vincent | 31 | > |kennyt | 28 | > |et | 26 | > | yannick | 21 | > |philip | 19 | > | derek | 18 | > | hholzgra | 14 | > | sean | 13 | > | dickmeiss | 11 | > | ali |8 | > | abies |6 | > | jan |5 | > | thetaphi |4 | > | samesch |4 | > | helly |4 | > | gui |4 | > | vlad |4 | > | curt |3 | > |mj |3 | > | stas |3 | > | cucinato |3 | > |andrei |3 | > | alindeman |3 | > | jdonagher |2 | > | hirokawa |2 | > | joey |2 | > |leszek |2 | > | conni |1 | > | poz |1 | > |ae |1 | > |rasmus |1 | > | amt |1 | > | hakan |1 | > |rioter |1 | > |nathan |1 | > | jsjohnst |1 | > | cece |1 | > |sp |1 | > +---+--+ >
Re: [PHP-DOC] I have uptodate commiter stats
* Thus wrote Dave: > On Monday, July 19, 2004, 11:47:40 AM, Philip wrote: > > > I thought we were going to scrap this whole "raw number of > > commits" thing in favor of individual credits per page. Or > > will both be used? In the very least I thought we agreed > > to never use raw numbers and to be an author you must > > prove it yourself. Quality versus Quantity. Show me the > > money! Computers dumb, humans smart. User note editors is > > one thing but being an author of the PHP manual? It just > > doesn't feel right but maybe that's because I'm not an > > author ;) > >... > > Also, a "commit" doesn't make you an "author" either. As Gabor noted, > I've mostly done search and replaces, fixing thousands of typos and > grammatical mistakes. The only real content I've added is writing all > the GMP function examples. I don't consider myself fitting into the > "author" category here, maybe the crazy-pedantic-proofreader/editor category? Although my opinion is rather skewed, I tend to agree with this. If I can devot some more time to the completion of the oop5 docs, would that be more of a contribution than 100 typo fixes? Perhaps a move to more of a author per section? The only reason being is that If I take any credit, it shouldn't be for the whole documentation, since I've only contributed mostly to the oop5 docs, which is only a small portion of the whole documentation. Curt -- First, let me assure you that this is not one of those shady pyramid schemes you've been hearing about. No, sir. Our model is the trapezoid!
Re: [PHP-DOC] I have uptodate commiter stats
On Monday, July 19, 2004, 11:47:40 AM, Philip wrote: > I thought we were going to scrap this whole "raw number of > commits" thing in favor of individual credits per page. Or > will both be used? In the very least I thought we agreed > to never use raw numbers and to be an author you must > prove it yourself. Quality versus Quantity. Show me the > money! Computers dumb, humans smart. User note editors is > one thing but being an author of the PHP manual? It just > doesn't feel right but maybe that's because I'm not an > author ;) > Someone needs to fix Bonsai so we can actually view these > commits. > Regards, > Philip I agree with Philip and don't think raw number of commits is a very good solution. But per page would also get very messy over time. Why not just have per-extension credits (where applicable)? Also, a "commit" doesn't make you an "author" either. As Gabor noted, I've mostly done search and replaces, fixing thousands of typos and grammatical mistakes. The only real content I've added is writing all the GMP function examples. I don't consider myself fitting into the "author" category here, maybe the crazy-pedantic-proofreader/editor category? Again, agreeing with Philip, I don't think you should get into the author list automatically. If people really want to be credited, they can email the list saying so, and why they think they should included. This doesn't seem like it's asking too much, and the raw # of commits has the potential for abuse. Whenever people see a "Top 10" list, instinctual competition habits may arise. Dave > On Sun, 18 Jul 2004, Gabor Hojtsy wrote: >> > http://goba.hu/commiters.html (beware 376 Kbyte html file!) >> >> Additionaly to this, here is the data of how many commits people had in >> the last half year (since january 1 actually) (with only those CVS >> accounts who had at least one commit). >> >> I propose we put a line above baoengb and add the people above it to the >> frontpage authors list (this is nearly the same as the magic 100 mark we >> use). I exclude baoengb here, because I know he achieved this high >> commit number mostly by adding translated stuff to the EN tree, and then >> reverting (multiple times AFAIR). Others are mostly respected people >> here AFAIK, and they deserve to be listed as top authors. Dave is >> someone to think about a bit, as he mostly achieved a top commiter >> rating by mass fixing small mistakes (html->HTML, php->PHP, PHP3->PHP 3, >> and such). >> >> Still I keep suggesting that the historical author list should contain >> people above the 100 commit mark from the list presented at the URL >> above (with a bit of human correction if needed). >> >> Funny that I am just above the line :)) >> >> OK, now provide your suggestions! >> >> +---+--+ >> | didou | 1291 | - Mehdi Achour >> | nlopess | 573 | - Nuno Lopes >> | georg | 245 | - Georg Richter >> | betz | 244 | - Friedhelm Betz >> | tony2001 | 243 | - Antony Dovgal >> | dave | 233 | - Dave (? - mostly done search&replace) >> | vrana | 219 | - Jakub Vrana >> | dams | 194 | - Damien Seguy >> | irchtml | 189 | - Kenneth Schwartz >> | goba | 172 | - Gabor Hojtsy >> >> +===+==+ (suggested crediting mark) >> >> | baoengb | 106 | >> | wez | 64 | >> |derick | 58 | >> | moriyoshi | 44 | >> |mg | 41 | >> | pollita | 37 | >> | progcom | 34 | >> | vincent | 31 | >> |kennyt | 28 | >> |et | 26 | >> | yannick | 21 | >> |philip | 19 | >> | derek | 18 | >> | hholzgra | 14 | >> | sean | 13 | >> | dickmeiss | 11 | >> | ali |8 | >> | abies |6 | >> | jan |5 | >> | thetaphi |4 | >> | samesch |4 | >> | helly |4 | >> | gui |4 | >> | vlad |4 | >> | curt |3 | >> |mj |3 | >> | stas |3 | >> | cucinato |3 | >> |andrei |3 | >> | alindeman |3 | >> | jdonagher |2 | >> | hirokawa |2 | >> | joey |2 | >> |leszek |2 | >> | conni |1 | >> | poz |1 | >> |ae |1 | >> |rasmus |1 | >> | amt |1 | >> | hakan |1 | >> |rioter |1 | >> |nathan |1 | >> | jsjohnst |1 | >> | cece |1 | >> |sp |1 | >> +---+--+ >>
Re: [PHP-DOC] I have uptodate commiter stats
I thought we were going to scrap this whole "raw number of commits" thing in favor of individual credits per page. Or will both be used? In the very least I thought we agreed to never use raw numbers and to be an author you must prove it yourself. Quality versus Quantity. Show me the money! Computers dumb, humans smart. User note editors is one thing but being an author of the PHP manual? It just doesn't feel right but maybe that's because I'm not an author ;) Someone needs to fix Bonsai so we can actually view these commits. Regards, Philip On Sun, 18 Jul 2004, Gabor Hojtsy wrote: > > http://goba.hu/commiters.html (beware 376 Kbyte html file!) > > Additionaly to this, here is the data of how many commits people had in > the last half year (since january 1 actually) (with only those CVS > accounts who had at least one commit). > > I propose we put a line above baoengb and add the people above it to the > frontpage authors list (this is nearly the same as the magic 100 mark we > use). I exclude baoengb here, because I know he achieved this high > commit number mostly by adding translated stuff to the EN tree, and then > reverting (multiple times AFAIR). Others are mostly respected people > here AFAIK, and they deserve to be listed as top authors. Dave is > someone to think about a bit, as he mostly achieved a top commiter > rating by mass fixing small mistakes (html->HTML, php->PHP, PHP3->PHP 3, > and such). > > Still I keep suggesting that the historical author list should contain > people above the 100 commit mark from the list presented at the URL > above (with a bit of human correction if needed). > > Funny that I am just above the line :)) > > OK, now provide your suggestions! > > +---+--+ > | didou | 1291 | - Mehdi Achour > | nlopess | 573 | - Nuno Lopes > | georg | 245 | - Georg Richter > | betz | 244 | - Friedhelm Betz > | tony2001 | 243 | - Antony Dovgal > | dave | 233 | - Dave (? - mostly done search&replace) > | vrana | 219 | - Jakub Vrana > | dams | 194 | - Damien Seguy > | irchtml | 189 | - Kenneth Schwartz > | goba | 172 | - Gabor Hojtsy > > +===+==+ (suggested crediting mark) > > | baoengb | 106 | > | wez | 64 | > |derick | 58 | > | moriyoshi | 44 | > |mg | 41 | > | pollita | 37 | > | progcom | 34 | > | vincent | 31 | > |kennyt | 28 | > |et | 26 | > | yannick | 21 | > |philip | 19 | > | derek | 18 | > | hholzgra | 14 | > | sean | 13 | > | dickmeiss | 11 | > | ali |8 | > | abies |6 | > | jan |5 | > | thetaphi |4 | > | samesch |4 | > | helly |4 | > | gui |4 | > | vlad |4 | > | curt |3 | > |mj |3 | > | stas |3 | > | cucinato |3 | > |andrei |3 | > | alindeman |3 | > | jdonagher |2 | > | hirokawa |2 | > | joey |2 | > |leszek |2 | > | conni |1 | > | poz |1 | > |ae |1 | > |rasmus |1 | > | amt |1 | > | hakan |1 | > |rioter |1 | > |nathan |1 | > | jsjohnst |1 | > | cece |1 | > |sp |1 | > +---+--+ >
Re: [PHP-DOC] I have uptodate commiter stats
http://goba.hu/commiters.html (beware 376 Kbyte html file!) Additionaly to this, here is the data of how many commits people had in the last half year (since january 1 actually) (with only those CVS accounts who had at least one commit). I propose we put a line above baoengb and add the people above it to the frontpage authors list (this is nearly the same as the magic 100 mark we use). I exclude baoengb here, because I know he achieved this high commit number mostly by adding translated stuff to the EN tree, and then reverting (multiple times AFAIR). Others are mostly respected people here AFAIK, and they deserve to be listed as top authors. Dave is someone to think about a bit, as he mostly achieved a top commiter rating by mass fixing small mistakes (html->HTML, php->PHP, PHP3->PHP 3, and such). Still I keep suggesting that the historical author list should contain people above the 100 commit mark from the list presented at the URL above (with a bit of human correction if needed). Funny that I am just above the line :)) OK, now provide your suggestions! +---+--+ | didou | 1291 | - Mehdi Achour | nlopess | 573 | - Nuno Lopes | georg | 245 | - Georg Richter | betz | 244 | - Friedhelm Betz | tony2001 | 243 | - Antony Dovgal | dave | 233 | - Dave (? - mostly done search&replace) | vrana | 219 | - Jakub Vrana | dams | 194 | - Damien Seguy | irchtml | 189 | - Kenneth Schwartz | goba | 172 | - Gabor Hojtsy +===+==+ (suggested crediting mark) | baoengb | 106 | | wez | 64 | |derick | 58 | | moriyoshi | 44 | |mg | 41 | | pollita | 37 | | progcom | 34 | | vincent | 31 | |kennyt | 28 | |et | 26 | | yannick | 21 | |philip | 19 | | derek | 18 | | hholzgra | 14 | | sean | 13 | | dickmeiss | 11 | | ali |8 | | abies |6 | | jan |5 | | thetaphi |4 | | samesch |4 | | helly |4 | | gui |4 | | vlad |4 | | curt |3 | |mj |3 | | stas |3 | | cucinato |3 | |andrei |3 | | alindeman |3 | | jdonagher |2 | | hirokawa |2 | | joey |2 | |leszek |2 | | conni |1 | | poz |1 | |ae |1 | |rasmus |1 | | amt |1 | | hakan |1 | |rioter |1 | |nathan |1 | | jsjohnst |1 | | cece |1 | |sp |1 | +---+--+
