--- Comment #5 from Santiago DueƱas <> ---
(In reply to Quim Gil from comment #3)
> The main problem I have with these graphs is that they show plenty of lines
> going up and down, but no clear message. 
> When answering "Time to closed by Priority", I think we should actually
> answer "Median time of open bugs". This would provide more stable lines
> without huge jumps between months, where we can see
> * whether we are increasing or decreasing the median time for open bugs
> * the differences of time response for higher and lower priority bugs
> I think this change will make all the graphs a lot more useful.
> Then we can organize better those six graphs:
> Time to closed by Priority
> Time to closed by Severity
> Then time to first action, then time to first comment.

I think you are right.

Please have a look at the new charts that I've just uploaded. Instead of "Time
to close" now we show "Time opened" by median and average. I've also included
the median for first action and first comment.

The main problem here is with those big peaks in median charts. The useful data
is lost at the bottom of the chart and you can only see flat lines. We have to
think about how to manage these cases.

Average charts are still there for comparing with the median ones. We can
remove them whenever you want.

> It would be good to have also a line for the median of the total of bugs,
> regardless of priority/severity, to see how good are we doing overall.

Good point. I'm going to add it.

> One more thing, since we are considering "Lowest" almost as an equivalent of
> WONTFIX-for-maintainers (we assign Lowest priority when nobody is planning
> to act on a report), we might need to consider them as resolved-wontfix if
> they distort too much the results. We will see.

I had it into account for top issues and "Time opened" so these data is already

You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Wikibugs-l mailing list

Reply via email to