[Python-Dev] Summary of Python tracker Issues
R. David Murray
rdmurray at bitdance.com
Sat Sep 25 23:02:18 CEST 2010
On Sat, 25 Sep 2010 14:22:06 +0200, Georg Brandl <g.brandl at gmx.net> wrote:
> Am 25.09.2010 14:10, schrieb "Martin v. L=F6wis":
> > The total numbers reported are really the totals. Also, the delta
> > reported for the totals is the difference to the last report.
> > The number reported with +/- for open/closed are *not* deltas, but the
> > number of issues opened since last week. As some open issues were closed
> > and some closed issues were opened, they don't sum up the way you
> > expect. An example:
> > old:
> > open: #1 #2
> > closed: #3 #4
> > new:
> > open: #1 #3 #5
> > closed: #2 #4
> > The report would be
> > open: 3 (+2, namely #3 and #5); delta would be +1
> > closed: 2 (+1, namely #4); delta would be 0
> > IOW, the numbers after +/- match the counts in the lists shown below,
> > not the delta since last week.
> Yes, and that's what I complained about. However, your example doesn't
> demonstrate my problem, since its deltas *are* real deltas, and
> +1 + +0 = +1.
> I guess a better example would be
> open #1 #2
> closed #3
> open #1
> closed #2 #3 #4 #5
> which results in +2 for open (since #4 and #5 were opened) and +3 for closed
> (since #2, #4 and #5 were closed), however the total issue delta is +2. Th=
> is why I think these numbers should be labeled "openings" and "closings".
I haven't looked at the code, so I don't know the details of the
algorithm that is actually used, but from what Ezio said your example
is *not* correct. The numbers in parenthesis are the number of issues
opened/closed in the past week that are *still* open or closed. So open
would certainly not be +2. I'm not sure if it would be +0 or -1 without
looking at the code.
I agree that having the delta against open from the previous week would
be the most helpful.
More information about the Python-Dev