I’ve been experimenting with Linked Open Data about FLOSS projects harvested from different sources of DOAP or ADMS.SW descriptions. I’ve tried and match upstream projects of Debian packages with upstream projects hosted at Apache, Gnome, or Alioth.debian.org, or catalogued on Pypi.
I’m matching them on identical values of the Homepage field (comparing the Homepage Control field set by Debian packagers with the doap:homepage meta-data in the RDF documents harvested from the upstream project catalogues).
Here are initial results of my little experiment, for number of matched projects, and results on project name’s similarity :
|Upstream catalogue||Total matching projs||Exact same project name||Same project name (case independant)|
|apache||31||0 (0 %)||0 (0 %)|
|alioth||16||13 (81 %)||13 (81 %)|
|pypi||439||217 (49 %)||273 (62 %)|
|gnome||21||0 (0 %)||7 (33 %)|
|Total||507||230 (45%)||293 (58 %)|
The data set contains tens of thousands of projects, with probably many duplicates, but from all of these, only 507 have common homepages.
As you can see, in some cases, the Debian source package names match the upstream project name (sometimes with lower/upper case variants), but in general, the project names aren’t identical, so it is interesting to try and match them by homepage.
For the curious ones, the Apache, Gnome and Pypi project catalogues use to pvovidg BDF meta-data for quite some time. More recently have we introduced ADMS.SW meta-data for Debian source packages, and even more recently for the Alioth projects (through the ADMS.SW exporter plugin for FusionForge).
There are still some ways for improvements, for instance to normalize homepage URLs which tend to vary (trailing slashes, or different HTTP/HTTPS schemes).
Stay tuned for more details.