4 ms·

Looking at OpenStack, it does look like an aggregate of all of the organization's repositories would be definitely the fastest growing. However, we looked at in

by schmatz 13y ago

Looking at OpenStack, it does look like an aggregate of all of the organization's repositories would be definitely the fastest growing. However, we looked at individual repositories, so that's why it's not on the graph. It would be interesting see the growth of the big open source organizations (GNU vs Apache vs OpenStack etc.)

kiallmacinnes 13y ago
OpenStack kinda has a single repo - every commit to the core projects triggers a submodule update in https://github.com/openstack/openstack https://github.com/openstack/openstack - and there are LOTS of projects which aren't included in this. For example CI and Developer tooling etc. > openstack$ git count -pm -n3 > 2014-03-01 2608 > 2014-02-01 2545 > 2014-01-01 2173 That looks OpenStack has 7326 commits in the previous 3 months. > codecombat$ git count -pm -n3 > 2014-03-01 642 > 2014-02-01 426 > 2014-01-01 427 The same tool gives me 1495 commits in the previous 3 months for CodeCombat. (The tool I used is https://github.com/moskytw/git-count https://github.com/moskytw/git-count )
- kiallmacinnes 13y ago
  Replying to my own comment feels odd.. whatever ;) If you're interested in numbers[1] shows the commits currently running through the OpenStack CI system at this very moment in time.. I'm counting 125 when I look at the page. In the last 24 hours, OpenStack's CI system has peaked at just under 1000 jobs ran in an hour, an eyeballed average looks like to be 450 jobs every hour for the last 24 hours. For build slaves over the same period, It looks like about 750 Jenkins slaves. Oh and - OpenStack has a strict 1 change == 1 commit policy. So "Fix typo in previous commit" never happens .. The actually reduces the overall number of commits ;) [1]: http://status.openstack.org/zuul/ http://status.openstack.org/zuul/
  - schmatz 13y ago
    This is so cool :)
- schmatz 13y ago
  That's quite impressive! It is apparent our analysis of GitHub events didn't account for "super-repositories" like this, as this would be the fastest growing repository on GitHub by a large margin, dwarfing large projects like Linux or Gaia (unless Apache or Mozilla also had these super-repositories.) I'm not sure it's quite an apples to apples comparison though xD On a somewhat related note, another interesting thing to note is that we found apparent discrepancies with GitHub's statistics for contributor counts. For instance, take a look at this PR: https://github.com/codecombat/codecombat/pull/372 https://github.com/codecombat/codecombat/pull/372 It was clearly merged. Now take a look at the two possible usernames GitHub could have used to tally his contribution: QelioX (his GitHub username) and Esh2349, the username he used on the commit. https://github.com/codecombat/codecombat/commits?author=Esh2349 https://github.com/codecombat/codecombat/commits?author=Esh2... https://github.com/codecombat/codecombat/commits?author=QelioX https://github.com/codecombat/codecombat/commits?author=Qeli... I looked, and I couldn't find anything out of place with his profile. Our method for growth through unique contributors actually handles this case. We didn't have time to explore other properties of the GitHub data set which might throw our analysis off, but hopefully someone in the future will produce a nifty analysis which does account for them.

by schmatz 13y ago

kiallmacinnes 13y ago

OpenStack kinda has a single repo - every commit to the core projects triggers a submodule update in https://github.com/openstack/openstack https://github.com/openstack/openstack - and there are LOTS of projects which aren't included in this. For example CI and Developer tooling etc. > openstack$ git count -pm -n3 > 2014-03-01 2608 > 2014-02-01 2545 > 2014-01-01 2173 That looks OpenStack has 7326 commits in the previous 3 months. > codecombat$ git count -pm -n3 > 2014-03-01 642 > 2014-02-01 426 > 2014-01-01 427 The same tool gives me 1495 commits in the previous 3 months for CodeCombat. (The tool I used is https://github.com/moskytw/git-count https://github.com/moskytw/git-count )

kiallmacinnes 13y ago
Replying to my own comment feels odd.. whatever ;) If you're interested in numbers[1] shows the commits currently running through the OpenStack CI system at this very moment in time.. I'm counting 125 when I look at the page. In the last 24 hours, OpenStack's CI system has peaked at just under 1000 jobs ran in an hour, an eyeballed average looks like to be 450 jobs every hour for the last 24 hours. For build slaves over the same period, It looks like about 750 Jenkins slaves. Oh and - OpenStack has a strict 1 change == 1 commit policy. So "Fix typo in previous commit" never happens .. The actually reduces the overall number of commits ;) [1]: http://status.openstack.org/zuul/ http://status.openstack.org/zuul/
- schmatz 13y ago
  This is so cool :)
schmatz 13y ago
That's quite impressive! It is apparent our analysis of GitHub events didn't account for "super-repositories" like this, as this would be the fastest growing repository on GitHub by a large margin, dwarfing large projects like Linux or Gaia (unless Apache or Mozilla also had these super-repositories.) I'm not sure it's quite an apples to apples comparison though xD On a somewhat related note, another interesting thing to note is that we found apparent discrepancies with GitHub's statistics for contributor counts. For instance, take a look at this PR: https://github.com/codecombat/codecombat/pull/372 https://github.com/codecombat/codecombat/pull/372 It was clearly merged. Now take a look at the two possible usernames GitHub could have used to tally his contribution: QelioX (his GitHub username) and Esh2349, the username he used on the commit. https://github.com/codecombat/codecombat/commits?author=Esh2349 https://github.com/codecombat/codecombat/commits?author=Esh2... https://github.com/codecombat/codecombat/commits?author=QelioX https://github.com/codecombat/codecombat/commits?author=Qeli... I looked, and I couldn't find anything out of place with his profile. Our method for growth through unique contributors actually handles this case. We didn't have time to explore other properties of the GitHub data set which might throw our analysis off, but hopefully someone in the future will produce a nifty analysis which does account for them.