From ee0145ce0ffb7340e4d7fc6bfc77f99be2000316 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "@permadeath.com"
- Why not query the pulls directly. A first attempt asked constellation which pull records pointed at
+ Why not query the pulls directly? A first attempt asked Constellation which pull records pointed at
each repo. That undercounts: the record has changed shape three times — an inline patch string, then
rounds with a patch blob, now versions with base and head SHAs — and 1,034 records
carry no target field at all, so a backlink index cannot see them. Reading each person's repository finds every record
@@ -102,8 +102,8 @@
and all three states, on knot1 and on self-hosted knots alike: 42 agreed, 0 disagreed.
- How complete is it. People were found three ways: repository ownership, backlinks in - constellation, and Tangled's own social records — follows, + How complete is it? People were found three ways: repository ownership, backlinks in + Constellation, and Tangled's own social records — follows, knot and spindle memberships, collaborator entries — read from each person's repository, which is the only channel with no index in front of it. 17,939 accounts were read in all. Checked against Tangled's own web interface: 42 of 42 sampled pull requests had the state derived here, and 71 of 73 -- knotmirror 0.0.1