I've heard that it is a whole lot and much more that the PMC policies warrant.
I dug into this to find out exactly what "a whole lot" is and whether it is a way to demonstrate, without breaching confidentiality, when activity more aligned with the policy is reached over time. Thanks for your question and welcome back, Phil. - Dennis -----Original Message----- From: Phillip Rhodes [mailto:motley.crue....@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, August 28, 2015 14:59 To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Re: [REPORT] PMC 2015-07 Private-List Activity through July So what, if anything, should we take away from this? My (completely superficial, naive and uninformed) feeling is that that is a LOT of traffic on the "private" list. But maybe not. Anyway, is the idea here that there should be less traffic on that list? More? The same? I have to admit, I've been pretty dormant for a long-time, so I'm a little out of touch with what's going on (gone on) here, but you have me intrigued with this. Phil This message optimized for indexing by NSA PRISM On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 3:09 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <orc...@apache.org> wrote: > From an AOO PMC Member, > > I have compiled a high-level traffic analysis of discussion activity on > the OpenOffice PMC private@ oo.a.o list. These are *statistics* and > noisy ones at that. I am looking for trends that are good-enough at this > level of precision. It is in the nature of private@ that message content > and even the topics must be held in confidence. > > This report of gross metrics is for the community's appraisal of current > state and later progress. The movement of discussions to the community > when the confidentiality requirements for PMC discussion do not apply > should be seen in movements at this level. Further reports over the course > of the year may provide an useful indicator. > > OVERALL PRIVATE MESSAGE TRAFFIC > > This is a breakdown of the traffic in the 212 days from January through > July, 2015, by role of the sender. > > 2015 | Private List Messages > thru July | PMC ASF Other All > > Totals 1145 182 31 1358 > Senders 22 23 23 68 > Per sender 52.0 7.9 1.3 20.0 > (average) > Per day 5.4 0.9 0.1 6.4 > > Of all the messages sent, > > 84% are by members of the PMC, > 16% are by other ASF participants, and > 17% are by others. > > The ASF participants include members of Apache Infrastructure, Officers of > the ASF, and other ASF Members and staff who make posts to the private > list. The "Other" senders are members of the public and non-PMC Apache > OpenOffice contributors that raise questions or provide information to the > PMC via private@. > > For the 1145 messages from the 22 PMC members who posted to the list so > far this year, > > 49% of the messages are from the three > PMC members who were the most vocal > in the studied period. > 75% of the messages are from the seven > most vocal. > 91% were from the most vocal 11 of the > 22 PMC members that posted. > > I confess to being one of those top three posters. > > > NUMBER OF SUBJECTS AND AMOUNT OF DISCUSSION > > A review of the same message archives, for January - July, 2015, tallied > > 168 subjects discussed across 1341 posts, > about 0.8 new topics per day. > The variance of 17 from the first tally > is negligible and will not be corrected. > The raw data is available for auditing > by the PMC. > > 8.0 is the average number of messages on a > single subject > > 5% is the portion of the overall messages > used in the longest thread, one with > 73 messages > > 50% of the messages are on the 20 longest > discussion threads. The shortest thread > in that group has 18 messages. > > 75% of the messages are on the 50 longest > discussions. The shortest threads in > that group have 8 messages. > > 90% of the messages are on the 84 longest > discussions (i.e., half of the > threads). The shortest threads in > that group have 4 messages each. > > The remaining 10% consists of 84 threads > having 3, 2, and 1 messages each. > > This does not speak to the quality or the necessity of these messages and > any particular thread. The PMC has detailed supporting data. > > [end of report] > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org