+1 to starting with limit of 5.

*Ankit Chaurasia*






On Tue, Sep 22, 2026 at 1:08 AM Sumit Maheshwari <[email protected]> wrote:

> +1 to having some limits, and 5 seems a good start to me.
>
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2026 at 1:05 AM Przemysław Mirowski <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > +1 to what Jarek and Vincent wrote. 5 as a cap sounds good.
> >
> > Best,
> > Przemek
> >
> > On 2026/09/21 19:23:05 Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> > > Correction: Thursday the 24th at 7:00pm CEST. - which is 72 hrs from
> the
> > > beginning of that thread,
> > >
> > > And one more comment: I thought for a long time about the metrics
> > "Threads
> > > vs. PRs". For me this is **embodiment** of community-aware, empathic
> > > contributor - on the way to become a commmiter. And I **knew** -
> because
> > I
> > > checked it before - that practically **all** committers have a very
> high
> > > number here.
> > >
> > > I deliberately never mentioned it in our discussions. As we all know,
> > > anything you set as a goal stops being a useful metric. There are
> always
> > > ways to game the system.
> > >
> > > That's why I waited for quite a while to accumulate the data and showed
> > > completely different numbers - and never discussed the thread vs. PRs
> > idea
> > > - to ensure this particular metric remained totally unbiased.
> > > And - just for the record - this is the last time this metric will be
> > > unbiased—now that we will publicly say we "care" about it.
> > >
> > > And here is Claude's analysis on those top-20. And my thinking is that
> we
> > > should care about the needs of groups in this way: A > B > C.
> > >
> > > ------------
> > >
> > > Three buckets, all 24 (top-19 + the five-way tie at 6 open PRs)
> > >
> > > Bucket rule, stated up front so the borderline calls are visible:
> > > engagement = others' threads per open PR (≥1.5 counts as engaged),
> > quality
> > > = all-time merge rate (≥40% healthy). I picked these thresholds to
> match
> > > where the data actually clusters - there's a real gap between 1.7 and
> 0.8
> > > on engagement, and between 40% and 31% on the merge rate.
> > >
> > > ---
> > >
> > > A. Net reviewers — they give back more than they ask for (9 people, 103
> > > open PRs)
> > >
> > > ┌─────────────────┬──────┬─────────────────┬─────────┬─────────┐
> > > │     Author      │ Open │ Threads/open PR │ Reviews │ Merge % │
> > > ├─────────────────┼──────┼─────────────────┼─────────┼─────────┤
> > > │ SameerMesiah97  │ 6    │ 60.3            │ 350     │ 90%     │
> > > ├─────────────────┼──────┼─────────────────┼─────────┼─────────┤
> > > │ shivaam         │ 6    │ 13.0            │ 55      │ 67%     │
> > > ├─────────────────┼──────┼─────────────────┼─────────┼─────────┤
> > > │ Vamsi-klu       │ 10   │ 10.8            │ 58      │ 38%     │
> > > ├─────────────────┼──────┼─────────────────┼─────────┼─────────┤
> > > │ Andrushika      │ 9    │ 4.6             │ 33      │ 79%     │
> > > ├─────────────────┼──────┼─────────────────┼─────────┼─────────┤
> > > │ yuseok89        │ 12   │ 3.8             │ 49      │ 77%     │
> > > ├─────────────────┼──────┼─────────────────┼─────────┼─────────┤
> > > │ steveahnahn     │ 14   │ 3.2             │ 40      │ 59%     │
> > > ├─────────────────┼──────┼─────────────────┼─────────┼─────────┤
> > > │ ColtenOuO       │ 23   │ 2.6             │ 70      │ 59%     │
> > > ├─────────────────┼──────┼─────────────────┼─────────┼─────────┤
> > > │ stephen-bracken │ 6    │ 2.3             │ 16      │ 56%     │
> > > ├─────────────────┼──────┼─────────────────┼─────────┼─────────┤
> > > │ fat-catTW       │ 17   │ 1.7             │ 33      │ 50%     │
> > > └─────────────────┴──────┴─────────────────┴─────────┴─────────┘
> > >
> > > Vamsi-klu is the odd one: 108 threads and 58 reviews (bucket-A
> > engagement)
> > > on a 38% merge rate. Placed here because the review effort is
> > unambiguous.
> > > fat-catTW and stephen-bracken are the borderline entries - drop the
> > > threshold to 2.0 and fat-catTW moves out.
> > >
> > > B. Shippers, not reviewers - volume with normal merge rates (6 people,
> > 115
> > > open PRs)
> > >
> > > ┌───────────────┬──────┬─────────────────┬─────────┬─────────┐
> > > │    Author     │ Open │ Threads/open PR │ Reviews │ Merge % │
> > > ├───────────────┼──────┼─────────────────┼─────────┼─────────┤
> > > │ Eason09053360 │ 35   │ 0.3             │ 13      │ 52%     │
> > > ├───────────────┼──────┼─────────────────┼─────────┼─────────┤
> > > │ 1fanwang      │ 34   │ 0.8             │ 36      │ 40%     │
> > > ├───────────────┼──────┼─────────────────┼─────────┼─────────┤
> > > │ rjgoyln       │ 27   │ 0.7             │ 34      │ 53%     │
> > > ├───────────────┼──────┼─────────────────┼─────────┼─────────┤
> > > │ Samin061      │ 7    │ 0.4             │ 4       │ 58%     │
> > > ├───────────────┼──────┼─────────────────┼─────────┼─────────┤
> > > │ jeff3071      │ 6    │ 0.3             │ 7       │ 46%     │
> > > ├───────────────┼──────┼─────────────────┼─────────┼─────────┤
> > > │ YAshhh29      │ 6    │ 0.2             │ 1       │ 45%     │
> > > └───────────────┴──────┴─────────────────┴─────────┴─────────┘
> > >
> > > The work lands—merge rates here are ordinary, some above
> > committer-adjacent
> > > levels—but the top three are carrying 96 open PRs between them while
> > having
> > > commented on 56 of other people's threads in total. 1fanwang sits
> exactly
> > > on the 40% line.
> > >
> > > C. Low engagement and low merge rate (9 people, 82 open PRs)
> > >
> > > ┌───────────────────┬──────┬─────────────────┬─────────┬─────────┐
> > > │      Author       │ Open │ Threads/open PR │ Reviews │ Merge % │
> > > ├───────────────────┼──────┼─────────────────┼─────────┼─────────┤
> > > │ bujjibabukatta    │ 16   │ 0.2             │ 5       │ 11%     │
> > > ├───────────────────┼──────┼─────────────────┼─────────┼─────────┤
> > > │ anmolxlight       │ 12   │ 0.4             │ 12      │ 31%     │
> > > ├───────────────────┼──────┼─────────────────┼─────────┼─────────┤
> > > │ dheerenmohta      │ 10   │ 0.2             │ 0       │ 28%     │
> > > ├───────────────────┼──────┼─────────────────┼─────────┼─────────┤
> > > │ namanjain24-sudo  │ 8    │ 1.1             │ 1       │ 11%     │
> > > ├───────────────────┼──────┼─────────────────┼─────────┼─────────┤
> > > │ Kunal8954         │ 8    │ 0.8             │ 6       │ 20%     │
> > > ├───────────────────┼──────┼─────────────────┼─────────┼─────────┤
> > > │ bramhanandlingala │ 8    │ 0.0             │ 1       │ 22%     │
> > > ├───────────────────┼──────┼─────────────────┼─────────┼─────────┤
> > > │ zozo123           │ 7    │ 0.1             │ 6       │ 17%     │
> > > ├───────────────────┼──────┼─────────────────┼─────────┼─────────┤
> > > │ GayathriSrividya  │ 7    │ 0.0             │ 9       │ 22%     │
> > > ├───────────────────┼──────┼─────────────────┼─────────┼─────────┤
> > > │ nagasrisai        │ 6    │ 0.7             │ 6       │ 29%     │
> > > └───────────────────┴──────┴─────────────────┴─────────┴─────────┘
> > >
> > > bramhanandlingala and GayathriSrividya have commented on zero threads
> > they
> > > didn't author. This bucket is 82 open PRs with an aggregate merge rate
> > > around 21% - roughly four reviews spent per PR that eventually lands.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > J.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 21, 2026 at 9:09 PM Henry Chen <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thanks Jarek and Vincent for the detailed data and perspective that
> > > > context is really helpful. Seeing the actual numbers (especially that
> > even
> > > > the top contributors rarely hit 5 open PRs), a cap of 5 makes sense
> to
> > me
> > > > as a starting point. Happy to go with it and adjust later if we find
> > it's
> > > > too tight in practice.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > > Henry
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to