Transferability record: first-contact translation on non-burned estates vs the 6 burned (2026-10-22 peek, honest gaps)

未关闭
  • 哪里不对？
#6,069 2 条评论 0 个 reaction 已指派 0 人 在 GitHub 查看

维护者通常 1 天内回复

还没有人认领这个 Issue。

评估

难度
4/5
预计耗时
1-2 天
新手友好度
35/100
Issue 类型
文档
描述清晰度
描述清楚
活跃度
活跃
技术栈
python
领域
documentation

调研方向

Read the issue’s recorded survey and evidence for the 2026-10-22 baseline, including the referenced #6064, #6065, and #6066. The issue reports a measurement and assessment; no files or tests are named. Done means documenting the real first-contact scan results for dsf and zopeneditor-sample, with the noted prior-peek caveat.

由索引模型根据 Issue 内容生成。

描述

documentation legacy-modernization metrics priority: medium scope:infra

What this is

An honest record of how far the translator built on the 6 burned estates carries over to code it was not built on. It records one unplanned look at non-burned code on 2026-10-22 and what it showed, so the next first-contact scan has a baseline and nobody mistakes burned-estate numbers for general capability.

Framing (owner, 2026-10-22): the first 6 estates we prepared for did not fully transfer to a 7th. That is expected and fair to say: we have depth on 6 estates and not yet the breadth. This record exists so the claim stays honest.

The peek, stated plainly

On 2026-10-22, while trying to estimate non-burned translation rates, the orchestrator:

  1. Ran det_survey.py --no-compile (translation only, counts only) over the 9 census repos plus the two pinned non-burned corpora dsf and zopeneditor-sample.
  2. Grepped dsf's PL/I files for the era tells of era_tags.py (counts only).
  3. Wrote two issues from what it saw: #6065 (batch file I/O + WRITE ADVANCING) and #6066 (PL/I CICS).

No cases were built and no code was changed. A decision to burn dsf was made and reversed the same evening: dsf and zopeneditor-sample stay non-burned. #6065 is parked in churn (needs owner) and #6066 stays frontier. No fixes derived from these corpora land before their real first-contact scan. We have seen their hole reasons, so that scan isn't fully blind; report it with that caveat.

Numbers (main 082aba881, 2026-10-22)

set programs translated whole statements translated
Burned, 6 estates (evidence report) 129 123 (95%) —
Burned, CICS programs (census baseline) 106 103 (97%) —
Non-burned, 9 census repos 40 8 (20%) 568 / 647 (87.8%)
census, translatable as supplied* 19 8 (42%) —
zopeneditor-sample (batch COBOL) 5 2 595 / 632 (94.1%)
dsf COBOL (batch) 7 0 231 / 318 (72.6%)
dsf PL/I (1,473 files, 575 EXEC CICS) 1,473 0 (COBOL-only translator) 0

* Excludes 3 non-programs (ISPF screen captures, a copy member), 9 source defects (text past column 72) and 9 missing inputs (an absent user copybook; IBM's z/OS Connect BAQRINFO, never shipped).

Over time: non-burned whole-rate was 24% on 2026-10-07 (5 / 21, CICS programs only) and 20% today (8 / 40, all COBOL). In the same two weeks burned CICS went from 70% to 97%. Different denominators, but there's no sign that the burned-estate gains carried over.

Honest assessment of the gaps

  1. Language breadth is the biggest gap. A real production estate (NAV's DSF, 1967–2018) is ~99% PL/I. Our CICS capability today is COBOL CICS; on that estate the translator covers ~0.5% of programs. (#6066)
  2. Batch outside the JCL-driven shape. The generator emits the batch runtime only when an estate holds an application JCL job, so batch programs in an estate without JCL lose all file I/O. Our burned estates all ship JCL, so they never showed this. (#6065)
  3. Statement families the 6 estates never used: WRITE … ADVANCING (0 burned files), JSON GENERATE/PARSE, WEB WRITE HTTPHEADER SESSTOKEN, SQL ROLLBACK inside CICS, variable-length records without RECORD VARYING.
  4. Input completeness: about half of census refusals are missing copybooks or source defects, not the translator. Real estates arrive incomplete; we refuse correctly, but the first-contact rate pays for it.
  5. Era profile. The burned estates lean era 2–4 (RESP, SQL, channels, async). DSF's PL/I CICS is solidly era 1 (HANDLE CONDITION in 254 files, DL/I in 111, HANDLE AID in 67, RESP in 1). Era-1 COBOL work (#5856-class) exists, but era 1 in PL/I is untouched.
  6. What does transfer: the statement core. Where a program translates at all, 82–94% of statements come through; 8 of 19 translatable census programs translate whole on first contact, and the holes are named, not guessed.

Going forward

  • #6064 makes the non-burned rate a scheduled, published number, so transfer is measured continuously, not by accident.
  • dsf / zopeneditor-sample: the next scan is the real first contact. Record it here, then decide on #6065/#6066.
  • Breadth is the fix for transfer: more estates scanned first-contact (the blind 4th-estate draw, #5865 missing systems), not more depth on the six.
主要语言
Python
星标
57
派生
11
平均合并
1 小时 46 分钟
30 天内合并 PR
972

环境准备

从这里开始

  1. 先读完整个 Issue，再读项目的贡献指南。
  2. 在 Issue 下留言说明你要接手 —— 这能避免两个人做同样的事。
  3. Fork 仓库，在一个分支上完成修改。
  4. 提交 Pull Request，并在描述里引用这个 Issue 编号。

squid-protocol/gitgalaxy 的其他 Issue

查看 squid-protocol/gitgalaxy 的全部 Issue

相似的 Issue

更多 Python Issue

把新 issue 发到你的邮箱

精选适合新手参与的 GitHub issue 摘要。