https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=61563
Quim Gil <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|[email protected] |[email protected] --- Comment #4 from Quim Gil <[email protected]> --- The tables and graphs are now considered ready: http://korma.wmflabs.org/browser/code_contrib_new_gone.html We are still missing better strings, but this is a task for me. I'm taking the bug. Help / patches welcome. (In reply to Nemo from comment #3) > The first table is rather straightforward, I've not really tried to > understand/analyse the second table and the graph. The second table show contributors that haven't submitted any patch in the last 6 months. I'm not especially happy about the results it shows, but we can fine tune them, and file separate enhancement requests. Is 6 months a too long period (when we identify them, they are long gone)? Should reviews and comments also be counted (maybe someone hasn't upload a new changeset in 6 months, but they are reviewing others'patches regularly)? Similar thoughts with the graph: it's a good first step, but we can probably improve it. The idea is to show the intake of new contributrs vs the established community; we want to see that we are not stagnant, and hopefully having a healthy trend of newcomers. Should we count only the last 12 months to have a fresher and more dynamic picture of the new contributors versus the established ones? Should we add a line for the number of contributors with more than 10 patches? Should we use a cumulative graph, like "How is the weight of the WMF evolving?" at http://korma.wmflabs.org/browser/who_contributes_code.html ? Separate enhancement requests are welcome. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Wikibugs-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l
