https://www.ohloh.net/ does not mark cookies as secure-only, allowing those cookies to get sent via plain http connections. Please mark all cookies as secure-only. Depending on how you use them, you ... [More] might also want to mark them as HTTP only, to mitigate risks of JavaScript-based attacks. See https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/HTTPcookie#Secureand_HttpOnly for more information. [Less]

Thanks for the quick fix!

Definitely. I worked on a number of Git commits which say at the bottom Commit by Some Person and Josh Triplett, but the actual commit authorship information has either Some Person or me as the ... [More] author, depending on whose machine we did the work on. [Less]

Any chance of a version of the widgets that uses iframes, to isolate the third-party scripts from the site?

Ohloh used to have a really convenient link in the top right of every page to report a problem or make a suggestion, either privately or to the Suggestions forum. I really appreciated this, and used ... [More] it many times to make well-received suggestions. This link seems to have gone missing. Any chance of putting it back? Thank you. [Less]

I really like the new logo feature. I noticed when attempting to upload a logo that when scaling it to 64x64 Ohloh didn't keep the aspect ratio. Could the scaling please keep the aspect ratio ... [More] , padding on either left and right or top and bottom to keep the logo centered? Thank you. [Less]

I didn't realize the incremental nature of the analyses; that does make this difficult. It would still help to know the current Ohcount version used for new analyses, though. Meanwhile, how about ... [More] somehow logging the Ohcount version in the project edits log, like the existing message showing an update of bestanalysisid? For the Ohcount version number, try git-describe. If the current revision has a tag, git-describe will output that tag; otherwise, git-describe will output a version of the form tag-${NUMCOMMITSSINCETAG}-g${SHA1ABBREV}. (You can adjust the length of the abbreviated sha1 with the --abbrev option to git describe; you often want to use the full sha1.) As for actually releasing a new version, the value of that varies. If you release on nearly every commit, that decreases the value of a release over pulling from the repo; if you release too infrequently, that will also decrease the value of a release over pulling from the repo. Ideally, a release should represent some increased level of stability due to testing, and pulling straight from version control trades some of that testing for freshness. If nobody tests the releases, and nobody goes to any extra effort to make releases more stable, then releases have no value, and you shouldn't bother making them. :) If you do decide that releases have value, I'd suggest deciding on a convention for version numbers in advance. Something along the lines of x.y.z, where you increment z for bugfix-only releases, increment y for new features (such as new languages), and increment x for incompatible changes to the interfaces (meaning breakage in existing interfaces, not just the addition of new interfaces). [Less]

For a concrete example, see the Aptitude project. It once used CVS, and Ohloh has the information from that repository, but it now uses Mercurial, and Ohloh has no record of that.

Bug report: In a project view, the stack it button highlights the number above it, but does not increment that number until I refresh the page.

The People with Similar Stacks option shows the programs in those people's stacks but not in yours, but it only gives the number of programs your stacks have in common. Could you please provide a way to show the shared programs? Thanks.