Hi, On 10/24/2012 09:53 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
I would have thought it obvious that ohloh should point to gerrit by default rather than GitHub which is (or when it is) "only" a mirror, why are you even considering the contrary?
The aim is to point to the canonical repository for each case. In most cases they are in gerrit, but in some cases it is actually GitHub. If you find a specific mistake please point to the URLs and I'll fix (or you can fix it yourself, as far as I'm aware all those projects are editable).
333 extensions are still on SVN, those need to be added to a project as well.[1]
Mmm are they planning to be moved to gerrit? Adding (hundreds of) repos is just as tedious as updating them again whenever they move.
https://www.ohloh.net/p/mediawiki-extensions-wmf and https://www.ohloh.net/p/mediawiki-extensions-wmf-unofficial look good (although -unofficial is a bit misleading);
I know but is the best I could think of given the string chars limit. Again, everything is editable - the URLs as well.
further splits are not needed IMHO, it would quickly become a maintenance nightmare. There are currently only 124 extensions in the former and 296 in the latter, so I think about 20 extensions are missing in total and 3 in the WMF-supported.[2]
Ok, I'll check today.
Or maybe they are in those separate single-extension projects under the org, which should be deleted alias moved and marked as duplicates.
Yes, we need to sort out those little projects. However, any extension maintainers are free to create an own Ohloh entry for their project. It will provide stats and promotion specific to their project. If they care enough, why not. The repo stats themselves are not duplicated.
Speaking of which, I see lots of MediaWiki-related repositories or contributors duplicated and scattered in many places, does this org feature also give you power to approve the "commit name claim" requests and the requests to remove duplicates of your org's projects?
I'll go through all those entries under the Wikimedia org and remove those tiny unmaintained projects that can fit under some umbrella, yes (probably after checking with the maintainers).
We can decide which projects appear under the Wikimedia umbrella but as far as I can see we have no permissions to delete projects as duplicate.
Finally, I don't understand where the other MediaWiki-related repositories will go, for instance Wikia's. It would not be very proper to just add them to another project under the same org, but then we have no way to see all MediaWiki development stats combined.
Well, this is a philosophical point that I was considering with half brain while the other half was copypasting repos: is this "Wikimedia" umbrella referring to the Wikimedia Foundation activities or to the Wikimedia community at large?
My *personal* take at this point is that we want to reflect the Wikimedia community activities, and therefore any MediaWiki related projects are welcome. We can always organize them under their own umbrellas in order to keep thinks together but still identifiable.
Ultimately I'm motivated by bringing technical contributors to Wikimedia projects, and this is a bit like gravity: the bigger your mass the bigger your chances of attracting stars, satellites and commets. ;)
-- Quim _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
