On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 07:04:40PM +0700, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy wrote: > > With or without "--no-merges", the big picture you can get out of > > "git shortlog -s -n --since=1.year" does not change very much, but > > the headline numbers give a wrong impression. > > These numbers are approximate anyway. Commit counts or the number of > changed lines do not accurately reflect the effort in many cases. And > about merges, in this particular case of Git where the maintainer imo > has done an excellent job as a guard, I'd say it's the credit for > reviewing, not simply merging. I agree that commit count is approximate. But counting merges is really quite a large factor of error (in git.git, it more than doubles Junio's count, and represents over 20% of the total number of commits). The GitHub contributors page counts merges _and_ fails to use mailmap. Yuck. I'm working on fixing that now. > But not using the link is fine too. We can wait for Jeff's patch to be > merged. After the discussion in the PR, I am inclined to think the site (and possibly the manpage) should just point to some decent contributors graph (either GitHub, ohloh, or something else; suggestions welcome). Anything else is just recreating a crappy static version of something that could be much more dynamic and explorable. I find the ohloh one a little more informative than the GitHub graph. I couldn't find any others (Google Code does not seem to have one, kernel.org and other gitweb sites do not, and I can't think of anywhere else that hosts a mirror). -Peff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html