Contributors icons: wrong, fictitious and missing

[softwarecreations]

I've clarified the issue with full data, skip down below
https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/57850#discussioncomment-6203093

[mrepol742]

You are there

[softwarecreations]

I've clarified the issue with full data, skip down below
https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/57850#discussioncomment-6203093

[mrepol742]

Hello @softwarecreations

I think it was arranged by who contributed first. I have no idea though how they sort it, but i think it's first contribute, first, in the list?

Im not quite sure.

[softwarecreations]

The contributors page is clearly sorted by number of lines added minus number of lines removed.
https://github.com/robfallows/tunguska-reactive-aggregate/graphs/contributors?from=2010-12-20&to=2023-06-12&type=a

First few

Last few

The contributors page shown above makes sense.

I think it was arranged by who contributed first. I have no idea though how they sort it, but i think it's first contribute, first, in the list?

That is not the case at all.

---

Front page contributors icon ranking is not based on contributions

Here's the data for the front page icons, the data speaks for itself

Contrib.csv

Takeaways from the data, regarding the front page icons

• There are 2 icons for accounts who don't appear at all on the contributors page at all, implying that they've made no contribution at all. Not even 0 net lines added.
• The 6th icon added 2 lines and removed 2 lines, for a net contribution of 0 lines added.
• I've contributed more than 6 other contributors, 5 of whom have icons on the front page. I've contributed more than 6 people who have icons on the front page if you count the 2 people who didn't contrubute literally anything at all.
• The other contributor's account who's icon also didn't appear, @faburem added a net 2 lines, yet he didn't appear on the front page either.

https://github.com/robfallows/tunguska-reactive-aggregate/

How do we report this bug to Github?

[the-officialjosh]

I am sorry for this and I get how you feel but the arrangement of contributors' pictures at the bottom right of a GitHub repository is determined by the GitHub algorithm. I know it is quite annoying when people who contribute lesser are ranked higher in the algorithm. While the exact details of the algorithm are not publicly disclosed, it is designed to showcase contributors based on their level of contribution to the repository.

Here are a few factors that might influence the arrangement of contributors:

1. Number of contributions: The algorithm may consider the total number of contributions made by each contributor. This includes commits, pull requests, issues, and other types of meaningful contributions.

2. Recent contributions: Recent contributions might carry more weight in the arrangement. Contributors who have been active more recently may be prioritized over those who haven't contributed in a while.

3. Diversity of contributions: The algorithm may take into account the variety of contributions made by each contributor. This could include factors like the number of different files modified, the number of pull requests merged, or the impact of their changes.

4. Collaboration: Contributions that involve collaboration with other contributors might also be considered. The algorithm may recognize the importance of teamwork and give weight to contributions made in collaboration with others.

It's important to note that GitHub's algorithm for arranging contributors is dynamic and subject to change based on updates and improvements made by GitHub. The goal is to provide a fair representation of the contributors' impact on the repository while taking into account multiple factors.

[softwarecreations]

@the-officialjosh thanks for getting back to me.
I see what you're saying that it's based on an algorithm that considers "Contributions" (as you elaborated) that are not shown at all or even hinted-at on the Contributors page.

That makes a lot more sense.

Now that I'm aware of this, I fully appreciate the points you made and the importance of other types of contributions beyond just code.

Having said all of that. I think your algorithm needs adjusting because I've contributed more code than most of the other contributors and (now that you mentioned issues being a factor) I authored a detailed issue and replied to it 5 times. And then I went on to improve the project with a PR that was merged instead of just complain about an issue like most people do, and I don't even get a last-place icon-ranking. And there are people's icons there who contributed literally no code at all. IMO that's not just an imperfection in your icon ranking algorithm IMO, it's broken.

For people who are trying to build up their profile for career purposes. Do you think they're going to bother going through the effort of making a significant PR and getting it merged, writing detailed issues and following up with them. And when they're objectively ahead of most other people in terms of tangible metrics.. they don't get any ranking?

It's not particularly rewarding (relatively speaking) contributing to somebody else's open source project. Because it means instead of just hacking around the issue, selecting a different package/technology/approach and moving on and making my company, colleagues and clients happy by getting things done faster I do on some detour to improve somebody else's project... share my fixes with other people, make them neat, get them documented, comment the code, ask the maintainer if they like the style etc.

It's not at all profitable.

If you don't incentivize contribution, you're going to get less contribution.

I'm not just talking about myself, but all software developers.

While software developers are working they have to decide how to allocate their time in terms of fulfilling their obligations and building future opportunities and also giving back. Giving back and "paying it forward" is important but you can get more contribution beyond people just being charitable with their time if you create fair incentive structures that are intuitive and make sense.

Right now your incentive structure does not make sense and is not intuitive.

Lacking that: Will developers allocate more or less time to open source vs supporting their own company, team, family etc?

I don't think there's anything further to be discussed on this from me. But you may want to pass this feedback to your algorithm developers.

[the-officialjosh]

I appreciate your feedback and concerns regarding the GitHub contribution ranking algorithm. It's understandable that you feel the current system may not adequately recognize the efforts of contributors who go above and beyond in their contributions.

To address these issues and provide your feedback directly to GitHub, I would recommend reaching out to their support team via email. This way, you can express your thoughts and suggestions regarding the ranking algorithm and its impact on contributors who invest significant time and effort in open-source projects. They will be able to consider your feedback and provide insights or potential adjustments to the system.

however, I am also a member of the community please mark the previous response as the answer for people with similar issues so they could be guided

[softwarecreations]

Sure, I can help you with that. Can you please let me know what is the email address for the GitHub support team?

[the-officialjosh]

support@github.com

[softwarecreations]

@the-officialjosh I'd like to help you by marking your answer as "the answer" however then this thread probably won't get any attention from GitHub because they'll consider the issue solved. And it's not solved. Your answer is just your speculation and doesn't change anything and doesn't give any feedback to the GitHub team either. So I'll have to wait for them to respond before marking your answer as the answer.

[the-officialjosh]

Ok no problem then when you get a reply 🫡

[softwarecreations]

support@github.com

I emailed github. It was immediately rejected and suggested that I go to https://support.github.com/ that leads me back to here.

[the-officialjosh]

You might as well have to wait for a staff to comment here but my response earlier was all I could give.

[github-actions[bot]]

🕒 Discussion Activity Reminder 🕒

This Discussion has been labeled as dormant by an automated system for having no activity in the last 60 days. Please consider one the following actions:

1️⃣ Close as Out of Date: If the topic is no longer relevant, close the Discussion as out of date at the bottom of the page.

2️⃣ Provide More Information: Share additional details or context — or let the community know if you've found a solution on your own.

3️⃣ Mark a Reply as Answer: If your question has been answered by a reply, mark the most helpful reply as the solution.

Note: This dormant notification will only apply to Discussions with the Question label. To learn more, see our recent announcement.

Thank you for helping bring this Discussion to a resolution! 💬