On October 5, 2019 1:08:12 AM EDT, Jim Kingdon <[email protected]> wrote:
>Oh and at the risk of making more work for you, any plans to do a >similar visualization for iset.mm? I have definitely thought about it, but I think that will require a completely different approach. For set.mm I use the dates within the current set.mm file. As you noted, for iset.mm that won't work, since those dates are often a copy-paste from set.mm (many predate iset.mm). > On the plus >side, the git history goes back pretty darn close to the beginning... >Hmm, maybe the date from git and the authorship from the Contributed by >line? That is possible. I think it might be more accurate to credit both the contributed by person AND the git committer if they are different. The gource input format has, in each line, a timestamp, user, and "pathname" being changed. Multiple lines can have the same timestamp and "pathname". However, that is such a different approach that I think new code would have to be written to compute it. It isn't just a tweak that can be added to the current code. > I suppose these issues are reason enough to focus on set.mm for >this for now. My thoughts exactly. --- David A.Wheeler -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Metamath" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/metamath/BE8F14E8-023B-4305-B3B9-3E016D3567E7%40dwheeler.com.
