LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for CODE4LIB Archives


CODE4LIB Archives

CODE4LIB Archives


CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

CODE4LIB Home

CODE4LIB Home

CODE4LIB  August 2011

CODE4LIB August 2011

Subject:

Re: Seeking feedback on database design for an open source software registry

From:

stuart yeates <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Code for Libraries <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 11:50:08 +1200

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (77 lines)

On 10/08/11 09:45, Peter Murray wrote:

>> Lastly, you may want to look into Drupal's project module. I think that's what they use to run their module directory. It seems like it would be a good starting point and may work out of the box.
>
> Cool -- thanks for the tip!

You may also be interested in the (older?) work at 
http://projects.apache.org/ and http://trac.usefulinc.com/doap For example:

http://projects.apache.org/projects/xindice.html /
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/xml/xindice/trunk/doap_Xindice.rdf

Interoperability with RDF/DOAP lets you build on others work and lets 
others in turn pick your work over.

At the very least if allows you to get suck in the latest and greatest 
releases automatically.

>> Second, the open source site Ohloh has some nice features for characterizing
>> a project, such as languages used, licenses, etc. Here's the page for the
>> same Kepler system in Ohloh:
>> https://www.ohloh.net/p/kepler
>>
>> Ohloh is nice because much of its information is harvested directly from
>> links to the open source code repositories for the project, which allows it
>> to show some nice trends in the software project's life.
>
> A colleague e-mailed me privately about Ohloh as well, and in particular
 > the metrics function to tell how viable a project is.  I haven't
> lookedat Ohloh yet to see if it is possible to call into its service
> to get themetrics for registered projects, but at the very least this
 > kind of project activity statistics is an important point for
 > considering an open source package and I'd like to find a way to get
 > it into this registry.

Ohloh is great. However it relies almost completely on metrics which are 
easily gamed by the technically competent. Use of these kinds of metrics 
in ways which encouraging gaming will only be productive in the short 
term, perhaps the very short term.

For example: it's easy to set up dummy version control accounts and 
there can be good technical reasons for doing so. It's easy to set up a 
build/test suite to update a file in the version control after it's 
daily run and there can be good technical reasons for doing so. But 
doing these things can also transform a very-low activity single user 
project into a high-activity dual user project, in the eyes of ohloh.

Turning on template-derived comments in the next big migration handles 
the "is the code commented?" metric.

The more metrics are used, the more motivation there is to use tools 
(which admittedly have other motivations) which make a project look good.


> On Aug 7, 2011, at 4:10 PM, stuart yeates wrote:
>> On 06/08/11 10:27, Peter Murray wrote:
>>
>>> Well, we certainly don't want to get into a situation where we find it is turtles all of the way down.
>>
>> Am I right in parsing that as "we have consciously decided to make the
>> registry blind to the concept of visualisation." ?
>>
>> Given that visualisation is such a huge trend at the moment, good luck
>> with that.
>
> Stuart -- I apologize for not fully understanding your point; I think we are talking past each other.  I don't see how limiting the scope of the definition of "Package" to just library-related or library-specific entities makes a statement one way or another on visualization.

General-purpose package modelling allows concepts such as virtualisation 
to be modelled using other package relationships. Library-specific 
package modelling requires visualisation (and by implication the next 
big development in that field) to be explicitly modelled.

cheers
stuart
-- 
Stuart Yeates
Library Technology Services http://www.victoria.ac.nz/library/

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTS.CLIR.ORG

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager