From: Levi B. <don...@sb...> - 2003-03-11 20:48:56
|
Does anybody else constantly get this message from sourceforge? recv() from server cvs.sourceforge.net: EOF -- Levi Burton http://www.puresimplicity.net/~ldb/ |
From: Chris C. <ca...@al...> - 2005-11-16 12:22:53
|
Looks like SourceForge has had a bit of a redesign. Rather oddly, several of the headings on the project pages (e.g. the ones saying "About Rosegarden", "Latest News", "Project Details" and "Public Areas") now show up in white-on-white on my browser, which doesn't seem very helpful. Can anyone make head or tail of the activity statistics? Rosegarden is listed has having an activity percentile of 97.25. If you look at the categories it appears in, e.g. MIDI, there are many projects listed with higher activity statistics even though there doesn't appear to be any way one could conclude they had had higher activity. For example, compare the Rosegarden statistics: http://sourceforge.net/project/stats/?group_id=4932&ugn=rosegarden with those of another project I'm involved with that is listed with a 99.24 activity percentile: http://sourceforge.net/project/stats/?group_id=104230&ugn=dssi Rosegarden has at least double the activity on every one of the metrics they list -- which seems about right to me, as someone involved with both -- yet RG has somehow ended up being ranked as the less active. Same goes for nearly all the other projects listed as more active than us in the same Trove categories. What's that all about? Chris |
From: Chris C. <ca...@al...> - 2005-11-16 13:38:13
|
On Wednesday 16 Nov 2005 13:33, Larry Battraw wrote: > Since most people probably go to rosegardenmusic.com > instead of the SF project page (rosegardenmusic.com comes up first in > a Google search too), the activity would likely be much lower than > DSSI, which has its homepage on SF. I think they measure page views via hits on the SourceForge image button, which we have on rosegardenmusic.com with an appropriate project ID in it. If you look at the two pages I linked, they certainly do appear to know that Rosegarden has the higher web traffic. What puzzles me is that the statistics they display all say Rosegarden is the more active by miles, but the ranking still says the opposite. Chris |
From: Silvan <dmm...@us...> - 2005-11-16 16:38:40
Attachments:
here.png
|
On Wednesday 16 November 2005 08:38 am, Chris Cannam wrote: > If you look at the two pages I linked, they certainly do appear to know > that Rosegarden has the higher web traffic. What puzzles me is that the > statistics they display all say Rosegarden is the more active by miles, but > the ranking still says the opposite. Both projects are a total flatline for "Web Traffic" as they appear here, but RG is clearly hugely ahead in the other three boxes. It was initially misleading because the two sets of graphs are scaled differently. I have no explanation. I've paid vague attention to this statistic over the years, and it always seems nonsensical. We get a top ranking at a time when everybody is on vacation, and a low ranking when the code, list and tracker discussions are flying fast and furious. Go figure. Incidentally, the white-on-white boxes you complained about show up as the attachment here. This is Konqueror on the left and Firefox on the right. -- Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan <dmm...@us...> Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621 http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/ http://rosegarden.sourceforge.net/tutorial/ |
From: Guillaume L. <gla...@te...> - 2005-11-16 18:55:53
|
On Wednesday 16 November 2005 17:38, Silvan wrote: > Incidentally, the white-on-white boxes you complained about show up as = the > attachment here. =A0This is Konqueror on the left and Firefox on the ri= ght. Same here, the boxes display fine. --=20 Guillaume. http://www.telegraph-road.org |
From: Chris C. <ca...@al...> - 2005-11-17 09:44:10
Attachments:
sourceforge.png
|
On Wednesday 16 Nov 2005 16:38, Silvan wrote: > I have no explanation. I've paid vague attention to this statistic > over the years, and it always seems nonsensical. Here's an interesting possible clue: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=200001&aid=1358089&group_id=1 That would certainly suggest the rankings are even more pointless than I thought. > Incidentally, the white-on-white boxes you complained about show up > as the attachment here. This is Konqueror on the left and Firefox on > the right. I get this (attached). I assume you have a newer Konqueror than my 3.3.2. Chris |
From: Larry B. <lba...@gm...> - 2005-11-16 13:41:11
|
Hi Chris, I've pondered the same question myself for other projects, and came to the conclusion that this activity rating is based on the number of page views/downloads for a project, not necessarily cvs or mailing list activity. Since most people probably go to rosegardenmusic.com instead of the SF project page (rosegardenmusic.com comes up first in a Google search too), the activity would likely be much lower than DSSI, which has its homepage on SF. Larry On 11/16/05, Chris Cannam <ca...@al...> wrote: > > Looks like SourceForge has had a bit of a redesign. > > Rather oddly, several of the headings on the project pages (e.g. the ones > saying "About Rosegarden", "Latest News", "Project Details" and "Public > Areas") now show up in white-on-white on my browser, which doesn't seem v= ery > helpful. > > Can anyone make head or tail of the activity statistics? Rosegarden is l= isted > has having an activity percentile of 97.25. If you look at the categorie= s it > appears in, e.g. MIDI, there are many projects listed with higher activit= y > statistics even though there doesn't appear to be any way one could concl= ude > they had had higher activity. For example, compare the Rosegarden > statistics: > > http://sourceforge.net/project/stats/?group_id=3D4932&ugn=3Drosegarden > > with those of another project I'm involved with that is listed with a 99.= 24 > activity percentile: > > http://sourceforge.net/project/stats/?group_id=3D104230&ugn=3Ddssi > > Rosegarden has at least double the activity on every one of the metrics t= hey > list -- which seems about right to me, as someone involved with both -- y= et > RG has somehow ended up being ranked as the less active. Same goes for > nearly all the other projects listed as more active than us in the same T= rove > categories. What's that all about? > > > Chris > |
From: Guillaume L. <gla...@te...> - 2003-03-11 21:56:30
|
On Tuesday 11 March 2003 21:46, Levi Burton wrote: > Does anybody else constantly get this message from sourceforge? > > recv() from server cvs.sourceforge.net: EOF Apparently it's working correctly here, but cvs.sf.net does have hiccups fairly often. It rarely last very long. -- Guillaume. http://www.telegraph-road.org |