You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Run a series of tests on authorship lists. Create a repository and scan it with several API calls to determine the full extent of identification we can get on authors.
Create a test repository with each of the following kinds of activity:
* a commit from the main author (set name and email to something unique inside command-line git-config)
* an accepted PR from @rmmilewi
* a rejected PR from a third party
* an issue reporting a bug from @elaineraybourn
* an accepted PR from @frobnitzem that contains a squashed commit log with contributions from a third author
- note: author and committer is distinguished
* a merge-commit by the main author with a third-party's changes
Regarding authorship, I believe we demonstrated today that corroborating/cross-checking with publicly available social media posts and project artifacts can be very helpful in providing contextual information about projects. I like the comment about including automation into the scope of contribution.
I know we have been using the term "author" here, but we use "contributor" in our documentation. Let's choose one. We may also consider the following as we progress:
The impact of ECP funding on growth of the repos -- is funding guiding the science and development, or are the repos developers leveraging funding to continue on paths determined by other factors?
Different definitions of community to analyze data--Is there co-evolution among dependencies (people and software)?
Run a series of tests on authorship lists. Create a repository and scan it with several API calls to determine the full extent of identification we can get on authors.
* a commit from the main author (set name and email to something unique inside command-line
git-config
)* an accepted PR from @rmmilewi
* a rejected PR from a third party
* an issue reporting a bug from @elaineraybourn
* an accepted PR from @frobnitzem that contains a squashed commit log with contributions from a third author
- note: author and committer is distinguished
* a merge-commit by the main author with a third-party's changes
Earlier, not actionable ideas:
confluence activity logs?should also check mailing lists (e.g. slate / scalapack) and project twitter / facebook pagesThe text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: