Almost two years ago I blogged about me reaching 10K commits as counted by ohloh.net.
Just a few days ago their counter counting my commits surpassed 15K and right now it says: 15005 commits and 46 kudos – ranked #69 of 273705. I think more of my projects have found its way there since then rather than me actually having committed 5000 times since then!
On sourceforge I’m now member of 19 projects (most of them are stalled). The latest addition is pycurl, which I’m basically a member of in order to try to help getting more people involved.
(The image is dynamically generated so when you read the old blog post it looks a little funny since it says the current numbers now…)
I am a stats junkie so I like my stats in large amounts. But I like the stats to be right and as accurate as possible, and when I look at what ohloh produces I like the concepts and ideas in general, I just think their implementation is lacking in a few vital areas that need improvement:
1. There are no dependencies or hierarchies between packages, so “I use this” counters get worthless since people mark end-user packages they use. Low-level support packages and libraries that are used indirectly don’t get many “use counts”
2. Doing very few commits in a very well used project with few authors gives you way way more points than doing a bus-load of commits in something less used with many fellow contributors. This makes the top-list of people very skewed as some of the top-64 people only did a few hundred commits ever. I doubt many mortals would consider someone who only ever did 300 commits to be a top community person. At the very moment I write this, the #1 ranked person has done 20 commits during 5 months…!
3. Too few versioning systems are supported, leaving out huge chunks of the open source world. Bazaar, mercurial and a few more are a bit too popular to be ignored without the results getting skewed.
4. I’d like to see the “number of users” of products as a percentage, as the total number of users they show include all contributors to all projects. Out of the 140,000 users (which undoubtedly include a lot of duplicates), it would surprise me if more than 10,000 have actually registered what products they use. I’ve tried to find the exact number but I failed. So 3,000 users don’t mean 3,000 out of 140,000 but 3,000 out of 10,000…
While most people I’ve talked to agree with my that the ohloh.net‘s kudo rankings seem more or less random, I didn’t post about this on their site until today when I found such a blatant example of weirdness that I couldn’t resist. One user with 173 commits in a single project and with only a “mere” level-1 kudo received outranks another user with 6800+ commits in 10+ projects who has received 23 kudos (including 3 from level-10 people)…
If this rakning is not due to a bug in the algo, I would say that the algo is bad since this just doesn’t look right.
Of course the whole idea of “kudo-ranking” people is somewhat of a tricky idea to start with, but now that it’s here I think it is worth to make it as good as possible. And by good in this context, I mean that (average) human beings that compare two people should end up placing them individually in the same order as the algorithm does – taken all things into account.
My post in the ohloh forum: Something is wrong in kudo ranking land
ohloh.net counts my commits done in 11 different open projects over roughly the last 8 years. (I am a member of 17 projects on sourceforge, but the remainders are old and/or dead projects.)
I’ve now truly surpassed 10,000 public commits, making roughly 3.5 commits per day over the years! Clearly that number and the number of people giving me “kudos” on the site makes me rated #55 out of 83,000. At least currently, my rating is slowly falling…
Anyway, since I’m a fan of stats and numbers, I encourage you to register your own projects and contributions there!
Maybe we should form a 10K commit club? 😉