Re: [Gitstat-devel] Current gitstat broken?

[Paul V. <pau...@gm...>]

Paul Mundt wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2007 at 10:27:05AM +0100, Paul Vriens wrote:
>> We know to what tag a commit belongs so it's fine to use that for the graph.
>>
>> The reason that the numbers were not correct is purely the date of the 
>> commits (AFAIK). If I take for example commit 
>> e7bd34a15b85655f24d1b45edbe3bdfebf9d027e:
>>
> [snip]
> 
>> This patch dates Jul-31 whereas 2.6.23 came out on Oct-9.
>>
> I don't know if it matters or not, but I do frequently rebase my trees,
> which results in a different timestamp for commit and author. Perhaps
> this is something that tripped up gitstat?
> 
That was my thought as well. We have seen several cases now where using the date 
is a bad idea so we need to find some other means. As we already had the tag 
with each commit (when it's stored in the DB) this was an easy one.

The problem has been there all along btw. It's just that with the latest release 
we also included the possibility to show release candidates which made the 
number of commits between tags less so more obvious to spot.

Thanks for the report anyway and I hope you continue to use gitstat. We have 
lots more changes planned and if you have any ideas/wishes just shout (or create 
a request on the SourceForge site).

Cheers,

Paul.