Re: [PATCH] (experimental) per-topic shortlog.

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Nov 28, 2006, 13:43 UTC
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0611281439500.30004@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>
In-Reply-To: <20061128131139.GA10874@coredump.intra.peff.net>

Hi,

On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, Jeff King wrote:

> I think it's clear that "important commits" is going to be something we 
> determine through heuristics; blame-able lines is probably a heuristic 
> worth considering.

I was surprised that not more of my stuff was in the top-15, since I submitted less-than-finished patches quite often. Especially merge-recursive was quite a bit of work for Alex and me.

BTW merge-recursive is a perfect example why this approach will break down: most of the rewrite in C took place in a private repository with quite some commits. This does not show in the git repository.

I fully expect the linux repository to behave similarly, since most of the features are cooked elsewhere, and not all of them are pulled, but some are applied (i.e. they appear out of nowhere from the repository's viewpoint).

Ciao, Dscho