Look at how Apache Flink is doing the reporting on the community: https://flink.apache.org/news/2015/12/18/a-year-in-review.html
Maybe we can learn from this. Best regards, Pierre Smits ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> OFBiz based solutions & services OFBiz Extensions Marketplace http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 10:40 AM, Pierre Smits <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Carol, all, > > You are right, numbers without context mean nothing. It is all about > correlation. Yet, one must start to measure first before the insights can > be created. But it must not be the end goal. It must all be seen in > relation to adoption, community growth and health. > > Best regards, > > Pierre Smits > > ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> > OFBiz based solutions & services > > OFBiz Extensions Marketplace > http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:13 AM, Carol Pearson < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I've looked at a bunch of things to get a handle on our users, growth, and >> what some other Apache projects have for committers and community. >> Trafodion is a database project, so I went looking for real data, >> everything from participation on our email lists (and new posts there) to >> Jira activity to Github forks and pulls and commits. I also monitor some >> more fanciful stats, looking for references to Trafodion on Twitter, >> stackoverflow, etc. >> >> As far as email list activity goes, I use the data from the mailing list >> archive. The user list was very quiet (fewer than 20 emails total from >> when Trafodion started incubating through December. That's not very >> inviting - our users who drove by to check us out didn't see much >> activity, >> even though there was a lot. So I don't pay too much attention to data in >> that range. Our user list has shown a big jump in usage in that period, >> slightly cannibalizing the dev list. >> >> Here are the numbers I have for Jan/Feb/March. Sorry for the funky ascii >> formatting, but mailing lists don't do attachments and tables very well: >> >> User List: >> >> MON Total Posts Distinct Non-Esgyn >> Posters Posters >> ====================================== >> JAN2016 19 12 2 >> FEB2016 291 42 6 >> MAR2016 126 25 1 >> >> Dev List: >> >> MON Total Posts Distinct Non-Esgyn >> Posters Posters >> ====================================== >> DEC2016 243 29 6 >> JAN2016 199 24 3 >> FEB2016 181 24 4 >> MAR2016 200 31 4 >> >> >> Note that Dec2016 was a release month and the Non-Esgyn posters were >> mostly >> IPMC posters helping guide our release with respect to things like >> licensing guidance. >> >> So we're seeing some additional participation but it's still heavily >> dominated by Esgyn. >> >> I count distinct posters by email address, so posters that use two >> different emails count twice. >> >> We have google analytics on the newly-redesigned website. It shows >> similar >> numbers of hits between new users and returning users, but I'm not sure >> how >> significant that is, since many returning users from Esgyn don't need to >> re-hit the website. >> >> Still, data is data, and here's a sample for the period from 29Feb through >> today, 29Mar: >> >> Metric New User Returning User Total >> ======================================== >> Sessions 885 895 1780 >> %New Sessions 100% 0% 49.72% >> Bounce Rate 60% 48.83% 54.38% >> Pages/Session 2.09 2.39 2.24 >> Avg Session 02:01 02:57 02:29 >> Duration >> >> And so on. >> >> >> But one thing I've learned over the years is that numbers are just.... >> numbers. These are nice (and I have plenty more), but the real question >> is, "what's a good score?" What's typical for Apache projects for >> committer distribution? What's typical for user list activity? >> >> I started with the first question: Where do committers come from and >> what's >> their distribution? I used the Apache committer lists and the websites >> that indicated committer affiliation. This wasn't perfect: Some project >> don't have committer affiliation; I can't trust others to be perfectly >> up-to-date. Further, it doesn't indicate committer activity. Still, it >> gives some targets. >> >> After I started, I refined the data a little bit by looking for projects >> similar to Trafodion along a couple of possible vectors: data management >> or Hadoop/Big Data ecosystem and recently graduated. The latter category >> is particularly interesting to me because I would expect more diversity of >> committers over time, if only because developers move around. >> >> I was not able to collect data on currently incubating projects because >> the >> list of committers I worked from on ASF did not include incubating >> projects >> in the phonebook, though the reports have them and many project websites >> have them. I was more interested in projects that climbed the mountain >> we're trying to climb: >> >> Here's some of the data I collected back in February >> >> Trafodion: >> ORG Count Pct >> ================ >> Esgyn 10 66.67% >> orrtiz.com 1 06.67 >> Unvailable 4 28% >> /Inactive >> Total 15 >> >> HBase: >> ======================== >> Cloudera 12 26% >> Continuuity 1 2% >> Dropbox 1 2% >> Explorys 1 2% >> Facebook 9 19% >> Hortonworks 7 15% >> IBM 1 2% >> Intel 2 4% >> Salesforce.com 3 6% >> Scaled Risk 1 2% >> Taobao 1 2% >> unaffiliated 1 2% >> WANdisco 1 2% >> Xiaomi 4 9% >> Yahoo! 1 2% >> Yuantiku 1 2% >> >> >> Formatting this is getting crazy and it's getting late since I was up >> early >> travelling. I'll just C&P and my apologies for the alignment >> >> Ignite: Graduated Sept 2015 >> ChronoTrack 1 4% >> CyberAgent, Inc. 1 4% >> Engiweb Security 1 4% >> Evosent Consulting 1 4% >> Fitech Source 1 4% >> GridGain 14 58% >> Pivotal 1 4% >> Shoutlet 1 4% >> Trend Micro 1 4% >> WANdisco 2 8% >> Grand Total 24 >> >> Calcite: Graduated Nov 2015 >> Dremio 1 7% >> Hortonworks 7 47% >> Intel 1 7% >> MapR 3 20% >> NetCracker 1 7% >> NGData 1 7% >> Salesforce 1 7% >> Grand Total 15 >> >> Or >> >> Count >> >> Spark: >> >> Alibaba 1 2% >> >> Bizo 1 2% >> >> ClearStory Data 1 2% >> >> Cloudera 4 9% >> >> Databricks 15 34% >> >> Databricks, MIT 1 2% >> >> Facebook 1 2% >> >> Hortonworks 1 2% >> >> IBM 1 2% >> >> Intel 2 5% >> >> Mxit 1 2% >> >> Netflix 1 2% >> >> NTT Data 1 2% >> >> Quantifind 1 2% >> >> QuestTec B.V. 1 2% >> >> Tachyon Nexus 1 2% >> >> UC Berkeley 5 11% >> >> University of Michigan, Ann Arbor 1 2% >> >> Webtrends 1 2% >> >> Yahoo! 3 7% >> >> Grand Total 44 >> >> >> >> I have a spreadsheet with a bunch more companies. I'll send it to anyone >> who >> >> asks - the data was all gleaned publicly. >> >> >> Anyway, the upshot from what I saw was that even recently graduated >> projects >> >> had 50-60% at most of active committers from one company (and I would >> guess >> >> are moving away from that as apart of the apache way. >> >> >> >> I have a spreadsheet that I'm happy to send to anyone who wants it - the >> data was all gleaned publicly. >> >> The upshot from what I saw was that even recently graduated projects are >> typically in the 50-60% range of committers from a single company. The >> largest percent I saw was 76% on the Ambari project. >> >> So that's some of the user data/growth data I have. Apparently, I'm more >> of a data junky than I thought.... >> >> -Carol P. >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------- >> Email: [email protected] >> Twitter: @CarolP222 >> --------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 6:57 PM, Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 10:01 AM, Pierre Smits <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > A >> > > distribution with Apache only elements (Hadoop, HBase, Zookeeper, >> Ambari, >> > > etc) would surely be a nice-to-have, and also a means to show >> > cross-selling >> > > Apache products that could lead to cross-pollination (adoption and >> > > community growth wise). >> > > >> > >> > That's known as Apache Bigtop. >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Best regards, >> > >> > - Andy >> > >> > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein >> > (via Tom White) >> > >> > >
