New service helps Java developers benefit from OSS contributions

Discussions

News: New service helps Java developers benefit from OSS contributions

  1. SourceKibitzer Bio is a free service that might help Java developers gain professional recognition for their contributions to the open source community. The tool creates an online "resume" that uses a set of achievement metrics to highlight a Java developer's skills and accomplishments, as gauged by their actual contributions to OSS. It combines both developer and software metrics to create high-level indicators of a developer's achievements and skill sets. As a result, SourceKibitzer Bio's software analysis creates a high-level, unique and verifiable "personal brand" for a developer. Some of the indicators applied include:
    • Know-how score: Indicates a contributor's breadth of knowledge, using selected OSS software and scored on a 1-to-10 scale
    • Size of personal contributions: Uses the code's syntax to measure in terms of code statements rather than a less accurate, format-dependent count of lines of code
    • Complexity and difficulty: Uses multiple metrics to measure complexity of the OSS code developed
    • Developer velocity: Measures the speed at which the contributor's OSS code is developed
    Setting up a SourceKibitzer Bio is easy and takes only a few minutes. Simply follow the simple procedure at http://www.sourcekibitzer.org. And, since the service auto-monitors and applies its metrics to new contributions as they are made, the resume self-populates and revises itself. For Java developers contributing to OSS, there is now a free tool that can help them establish a valuable and marketable presence, based on their skills, and open doors to new professional opportunities.

    Threaded Messages (10)

  2. Ohloh[ Go to top ]

    Not trying to troll here, but is this anything like ohloh.net?
  3. SourceKibitzer vs Ohloh[ Go to top ]

    Not trying to troll here, but is this anything like ohloh.net?
    Not exactly! Ohloh is an open source directory. At least that is what their title says. As I understand it means they are more oriented towards users of different open source and cover more information about software itself. On the other hand SourceKibitzer is about contributors and for the contributors. Our current features like bio and interviews and also new features coming out in the future will be focused on Java developers already contributing to open source or just planning to do that. Some other facts you can consider while comparing us: * SourceKibitzer already bases its indicators on 10 code metrics. And we plan to introduce more. If you take closer look, then in ohloh you have only 1 basic code metric. Which is lines of code - not the best reputation metric :) All the facts like project cost, factoids, and other are calculated from that. Thats my guess though * SourceKibitzer is focused on Java. It gives us a chance to have a variety of more accurate and detailed metrics. If you would like to hear more about SourceKibitzer, than get in touch with me :) Mark http://www.sourcekibitzer.org/Bio.ext?sp=l8
  4. Re: SourceKibitzer vs Ohloh[ Go to top ]

    OK. Nice answer. Thanks, Mark! :)
  5. Metrics[ Go to top ]

    Hi, I just had a look at the site and I wonder how the metrics are computed. Example: The "Developer of the week" is Jevgeni Kabanov. Apparently, he's the "co-founder and lead of Aranea Web Framework", yet his know how score for that framework is 4.6. What does this mean? He's the lead but doesn't have too much of a clue? Not nagging, but looks like one could know a lot about some OSS software and still score very low. Tobias
  6. Re: Metrics[ Go to top ]

    Hi,

    I just had a look at the site and I wonder how the metrics are computed.

    Example: The "Developer of the week" is Jevgeni Kabanov. Apparently, he's the "co-founder and lead of Aranea Web Framework", yet his know how score for that framework is 4.6. What does this mean? He's the lead but doesn't have too much of a clue?

    Not nagging, but looks like one could know a lot about some OSS software and still score very low.

    Tobias
    Alfonzo, let me disagree. I'd start with an explanation of know-how score: it indicates the *breadth* of contributors knowledge of the selected project on a 10 scale. So, i believe that 4.6 is a very high value - in a large project it is really difficult to be knowledgeable about every project part and aspect. For instance, i would say that a person having a know-how indicator equal to 1 in Spring Framework is an outstanding open source contributor! Finally, I think that it is not vital for the lead to know every nitty-gritty of his/her project. It is much more important to keep an eye on key aspects and have a clear vision of the roadmap. Anton http://www.sourcekibitzer.org/Bio.ext?sp=l20
  7. Re: Metrics[ Go to top ]

    Hi,

    I just had a look at the site and I wonder how the metrics are computed.

    Example: The "Developer of the week" is Jevgeni Kabanov. Apparently, he's the "co-founder and lead of Aranea Web Framework", yet his know how score for that framework is 4.6. What does this mean? He's the lead but doesn't have too much of a clue?

    Not nagging, but looks like one could know a lot about some OSS software and still score very low.

    Tobias


    Alfonzo, let me disagree.

    I'd start with an explanation of know-how score: it indicates the *breadth* of contributors knowledge of the selected project on a 10 scale.

    So, i believe that 4.6 is a very high value - in a large project it is really difficult to be knowledgeable about every project part and aspect. For instance, i would say that a person having a know-how indicator equal to 1 in Spring Framework is an outstanding open source contributor!

    Finally, I think that it is not vital for the lead to know every nitty-gritty of his/her project. It is much more important to keep an eye on key aspects and have a clear vision of the roadmap.

    Anton
    I think what made the score so low in this case is that the initial import of code was not most probably marked by my name. And most of it was written by me. If projects kept all of their history the score will be more accurate (an yes, it is important for the project technical lead to know the nitty/gritty details on at least some level).
  8. Re: Metrics[ Go to top ]

    For instance, i would say that a person having a know-how indicator equal to 1 in Spring Framework is an outstanding open source contributor!
    Anton, With respect, if your system is going to be useful to anyone you need to find a better formula for calculating this score. If I had never heard of the spring framework, and I see a score of 1, how am I supposed to know that this person is an 'outstanding open source contributor'. Frankly, here on planet earth, a score of 1 out of 10 is considered low. Can you not tweak this formula in a way that 'outstanding contributors' are ranked in the 8-10 range? I think you need to consider grading on a curve.
  9. Re: Metrics[ Go to top ]

    Hi, Wesley! I agree with you that grades should be tweaked in order to be more intuitive and illustrative. Grading on a curve is an interesting thought! Thanks! But, if the Jevgeni's case is really about other people performing commits of his code, then it is a bit trickier than just curve grades. Anyway, huge thanks for the critics!
  10. Re: Metrics[ Go to top ]

    Now that I though of it the main problem was that blasted CVS does not preserve moved folder history. And Aranea package names have been changed a few times before initial release. Not sure whose name was used. In any case this is our fault (with the help of CVS) for not keeping history properly.
  11. I signed up for an account, but I was not able to figure out how to relate myself to an open source project where I am a committer. The project is listed on SourceKibitzer and I am listed as an 'anonymous contributor' on the project's SourceKibitzer page.