Hi Stef, On Thu, 2014-06-12 at 17:07 -0700, Stefano Maffulli wrote: > we're working on a quarterly report of activities in all our git and > gerrit repositories to understand the dynamics of contributions across > different dimensions. This report will be similar to what Bitergia > produced at release time. > > I'd like to discuss more widely the format of how to meaningfully group > the information presented. One basic need is to have a top level view > and then drill down based on the release status of each project. A > suggested classification would be based on the programs.yaml file: > > - OpenStack Software (top level overview): > - integrated > - incubated > - clients > - other: > devstack > deployment > common libraries > - OpenStack Quality Assurance > - OpenStack Documentation > - OpenStack Infrastructure > - OpenStack Release management > > It seems easy but based on that grouping, integrated and incubated git > repositories are easy to spot in programs.yaml (they have > integrated-since attribute). > > Let's have the Sahara program as an example: > > projects: > - repo: openstack/sahara > incubated-since: icehouse > integrated-since: juno > - repo: openstack/python-saharaclient > - repo: openstack/sahara-dashboard > - repo: openstack/sahara-extra > - repo: openstack/sahara-image-elements > - repo: openstack/sahara-specs > > So, for the OpenStack Software part: > * openstack/sahara is integrated in juno and incubated since icehouse. > * Then clients: python-saharaclient is easy to spot. Is it standard and > accepted practice that all client projects are called > python-$PROGRAM-NAMEclient? > * And what about the rest of the sahara-* projects: where would they go? > with openstack/sahara? or somewhere else, in others? devstack? > common-libraries? > > Other repositories for which I have no clear classification: > > - repo: openstack/swift-bench > - repo: openstack/django_openstack_auth > - repo: openstack/tuskar-ui > - repo: openstack/heat-cfntools > - repo: openstack/heat-specs > - repo: openstack/heat-templates > - repo: openstack-dev/heat-cfnclient > - repo: openstack/trove-integration > - repo: openstack/ironic-python-agent > - repo: stackforge/kite > > Any suggestions on how you would like to see these classified: with > together with the integrated/incubated 'parent' program (sahara with > sahara-dashboard, sahara-extra etc or separately under 'other'? Or > they're all different and we need to look at them one by one? > > Let me know what you think (tomorrow office hour, 11am PDT, is a good > time to chat about this).
You can also refer to the example of Stackalytics, who have created their own hierarchy and groupings for metrics reporting: https://github.com/stackforge/stackalytics/blob/master/etc/default_data.json I have found this grouping to be pretty logical and useful. For my own internal metrics, I also rely on the programs.yaml file organization, and / or the "Programs" wiki page https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Programs where they differ. Further, I group all the "other" projects that do not clearly fit into a separate "bucket" grouping, until they either disappear or become incorporated into other groupings. Dan _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
