Forums : Technical Issue Help
Dear Open Hub Users,
We’re excited to announce that we will be moving the Open Hub Forum to
https://community.blackduck.com/s/black-duck-open-hub.
Beginning immediately, users can head over,
register,
get technical help and discuss issue pertinent to the Open Hub. Registered users can also subscribe to Open Hub announcements here.
On May 1, 2020, we will be freezing https://www.openhub.net/forums and users will not be able to create new discussions. If you have any questions and concerns, please email us at
info@openhub.net
iText repositories changed from SVN to Git, rescan needed
All projects by iText Software have switched from Subversion to Git.
I deleted all SVN repos from the project pages and added the Git repos. The projects are:
- https://www.openhub.net/p/itext
- https://www.openhub.net/p/xmlworker
- https://www.openhub.net/p/rups
- https://www.openhub.net/p/itextsharp
As part of the Git migration, there was some reorganisation: directories have been split off into separate repos. So I think it's best that the projects are rescanned from scratch.
I see that the iText project has been rescanned, 15 hours ago. Great!
However, now it says that the first commit was December 2009. That is not correct. The first commit was December 2000. Where has 9 years of history gone?
Amedee,
Will need to examine each of the repositories to see if the history goes back any further than December 2009. We keep no history for repositories that are no longer enlisted. If the entire history wasn't imported from the subversion to the git then you have a decision to make. You can re-enlist the subversion repositories (actually easier than you think from the edits menu - just press redo
) but there's a price to pay: with both the subversions and gits enlisted, there will be substantial code duplication (I would think) between the two. This will cause inaccuracy issues with the lines-of-code counts and all the metrics which are driven from these statistics like person-days of effort and COCOMO cost estimates etc. The choice is to be accurate about the statistics for today's code or to be true to the developers' history and efforts over the years. Sometimes I suggest to managers that they could maintain two projects here - one that reflects the current state of the project and another that retains the historical data combined with the current development and then cherry-pick the statistics from both projects to present an accurate picture of the project from all the angles. More work, of course.
Thanks!
P.S. This also presumes that the subversion repositories will stay available to be queried. If they are taken out-of-service then all bets are off. You could arrange to mirror them to a free subversion host before they go away if that possibility exists.
Amedee,
Only history that goes to 2009 is for book
. All the rest look like 2011, 2012, 2013.
Thanks!
Amedee,
Re itext: Analyzed on Friday, April 03, 2015 based on code collected on Friday, April 03, 2015
.
Re xmlworker: Analyzed on Friday, April 03, 2015 based on code collected on Friday, April 03, 2015
.
Re rups: Analyzed on Friday, April 03, 2015 based on code collected on Friday, April 03, 2015
.
Re itextsharp: Analyzed on Friday, April 03, 2015 based on code collected on Thursday, April 02, 2015
.
Thanks!
Well, I can only say, if I look at the release tags on GitHub, then the 1.0.0 release was on June 28 2003:
https://github.com/itext/itextpdf/releases/tag/iText10_0
and GitHub also has the 3 years development history before 1.0.0.
The mirror on SourceForge has a more intuitive web interface to find the very first commit:
https://sourceforge.net/p/itext/itextpdf/ci/53d2106d76270f4bd462a88b5ea06e6c1f8600dc/
and that is dated 2000-11-28.
And indeed, when I take that SHA back to GitHub: https://github.com/itext/itextpdf/commit/53d2106d76270f4bd462a88b5ea06e6c1f8600dc
then I get blowagie authored on Nov 28, 2000
I am not going to re-add the SVN repos because
- code duplication, as you say
- as part of the svn2git migration, the repo was split up in several parts. What used to be in subdirectories, is now in the root of each repo. So the paths are different. Adding all the git repos would still deliver an accurate statistic for developers efforts in the past and present.
This is only about the itextpdf repo (the iText core), because I know that there was a break
in the history when the project was mavenized
in 2009. Directories were moved around in SVN, and probably not in a way that SVN was able to track it. So after the svn2git mifration, there was a gap in the history. I fixed that gap, which meant rewriting all SHAs from 2009 up to today, and force pushing to the public repos (GitHub and SourceForge). But OpenHub indexed itextpdf before the force push was done.