Request to use GNU guix reproducibility bugs data for research project | University of Waterloo

  • Done
  • quality assurance status badge
Details
3 participants
  • Tobias Geerinckx-Rice
  • Muhammad Hassan
  • zimoun
Owner
unassigned
Submitted by
Muhammad Hassan
Severity
normal

Debbugs page

M
M
Muhammad Hassan wrote on 29 Oct 2021 09:48
(name . bug-guix@gnu.org)(address . bug-guix@gnu.org)
YQBPR0101MB581397F18F7C0B3DD13AEFCE86879@YQBPR0101MB5813.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM
Hello,

I hope you are doing well.

I would like to scrap reproducibility bugs data from the linked website to use in my research project that is being conducted at the University of Waterloo. I am a Master's student.

The project aims to provide automated support for non-reproducibility detection.

Please tell me if there is an API that I can use to scrap the data.

Guix issue tracker. This is a web frontend to the Guix patch and bug trackers. Send email to guix-patches@gnu.org to submit a patch, or email bug-guix@gnu.org to submit a bug report.
issues.guix.gnu.org



Regards,

Muhammad Hassan
M.Math (Computer Science) || University of Waterloo


Attachment: file
Z
Z
zimoun wrote on 2 Nov 2021 04:44
control message for bug #51492
(address . control@debbugs.gnu.org)
865ytazss5.fsf@gmail.com
tags 51492 notabug
close 51492
quit
T
T
Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote on 2 Nov 2021 23:12
Re: bug#51492: Request to use GNU guix reproducibility bugs data for research project | University of Waterloo
(name . Muhammad Hassan)(address . muhammad.hassan@uwaterloo.ca)
877ddp911u.fsf@nckx
Muhammad,

[CCing Christopher Baines, who may skip straight to the last
paragraph because they're probably busy building cool stuff.]

Good luck in your research.

Muhammad Hassan 写道：
Toggle quote (5 lines)
> Please tell me if there is an API that I can use to scrap the
> data.
>
> https://issues.guix.gnu.org/

Hm, are you sure that our bug tracker is at all useful here? I
doubt it! There are a relative handful of ‘foo isn't
reproducible’ bugs but they're the opposite of comprehensive or
standardised. There are no categories nor labels nor automated
closings when an issue is fixed.

I think what you really want is this[0] (source: [1]).

Mouth-watering indeed!

One problem: the Package Reproducibility page is gone :-( I'm
surprised: it was still there a few months ago. Christopher, is
this deliberate? If so, is there any way we could help bring it
back? Is the historical data safe and is new data still tracked?

Kind regards,

T G-R

[0]:
[1]:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iIMEARYKACsWIQT12iAyS4c9C3o4dnINsP+IT1VteQUCYYIzbQ0cbWVAdG9iaWFz
LmdyAAoJEA2w/4hPVW15aOUBAN2s3rRgqgwvRY1+XTUltugwiUxbXkt2X5KNOQUo
HQe/AP0XXeG9THTT7xQ8mLvpKllrbKowWwM8cB533v8DUCaaDw==
=WITs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

?
Your comment

This issue is archived.

To comment on this conversation send an email to 51492@patchwise.org

To respond to this issue using the mumi CLI, first switch to it
mumi current 51492
Then, you may apply the latest patchset in this issue (with sign off)
mumi am -- -s
Or, compose a reply to this issue
mumi compose
Or, send patches to this issue
mumi send-email *.patch