I wish I'd made it to that Forum session, but here's my two cents now: As a core reviewer for LBaaS I actually find Stackalytics quite helpful for giving me a quick snapshot of contributions, and it lines up almost perfectly in my experience with what I see when I'm actually reviewing and working with people (if you know which statistics to look at -- just sorting by sheer number of reviews or commits and ignoring everything else is of course not useful, and as you say possibly misleading). In all though I actually find that it is a very accurate representation of people's work.
For example, in looking at reviewer contributions, I make a mental score based on both the number of reviews, but also the +% (this shouldn't be too high) and the disagreement score (low is generally good, but 0% with a high review count might be questionable). So, I know to discount someone who just spams +1 at everything that has a +2 already and doesn't contribute anything else, which can go unnoticed while reading reviews but sticks out like a sore thumb in Stackalytics. The other side of the coin is someone who posts a ton of useless comments and -1's everything, which then is super obvious to anyone who actually reads reviews. Maybe the experience with the projects I work on is a little different than some of the more populous "base" services like Nova or Neutron? Regardless, I'd be really sad to see it go, as I use it multiple times a week for various reasons. So, I definitely agree with keeping it around and possibly focusing on improving the way the data is displayed. It is definitely best used as one tool in a toolkit, not taken alone as a single source of truth. Is that the main problem people are trying to solve? --Adam On Wed, Jun 7, 2017, 16:38 Ken'ichi Ohmichi <[email protected]> wrote: > 2017-05-17 11:55 GMT-07:00 Jeremy Stanley <[email protected]>: > > On 2017-05-17 16:16:30 +0200 (+0200), Thierry Carrez wrote: > > [...] > >> we need help with completing the migration to infra. If interested > >> you can reach out to fungi (Infra team PTL) nor mrmartin (who > >> currently helps with the transition work). > > [...] > > > > The main blocker for us right now is addressed by an Infra spec > > (Stackalytics is an unofficial project and it's unclear to us where > > design discussions for it happen): > > > > https://review.openstack.org/434951 > > I also want to find a good design discussion space for stackalytics future. > For example, one of config files is 30KL due to much user information > and that makes the maintenance hard now. > I am trying to separate user part from the existing file but I cannot > find the way to make a consensus for such thing. > In addition, we have two ways for managing bug reports: launchpad and > storyboard if considering it as infra project. > It would be necessary to transport them from launchpad, I guess. > > > In particular, getting the current Stackalytics developers on-board > > with things like this is where we've been failing to make progress > > mainly (I think) because we don't have a clear venue for discussions > > and they're stretched pretty thin with other work. If we can get > > some additional core reviewers for that project (and maybe even talk > > about turning it into an official team or joining them up as a > > deliverable for an existing team) that might help. > > Yeah, diversity will be great for our future. > > Thanks > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
