Hi!

El lun, 19-08-2013 a las 13:05 -0700, Quim Gil escribió:
> On 08/16/2013 04:12 AM, Alvaro del Castillo wrote:
> > Dear all,
> >
> > El lun, 12-08-2013 a las 19:21 +0200, Quim Gil escribió:
> >> # Who is contributing merged code each quarter? More origins == Better.
> >> ## WMF / WMDE / other Wikimedia / companies / OSS projects / independents
> >> ## Location of contributors (based on provided data)
> >>
> >> # Time to resolve Gerrit changes. Shorter == Better.
> >> ## Authored by WMF/WMDE employees vs independent. Should be the same.
> >> ## Merged vs rejected. Similar progress?
> >> ## Best projects vs bottlenecks.
> >>
> >> # Queue of open Gerrit change requests in relation to total amount of
> >> contributions. Shorter == Better.
> >> ## Same points as above.
> >>
> >> # New contributors with 1 / 2-5 / 6+ changes submitted in the past 3
> >> months. More == Better.
> >> ## % of merged / rejected.
> >> ## Who is growing / stable / vanishing?
> >>
> >> # Age of contributors since they started in the project. Small and
> >> regular decline == Better.
> >> ## Number of contributions from each age group in the past quarters.
> >> ## WMF / non-WMF ratio for each age group.
> >
> > Quim, thinking about those metrics, they are all related to Gerrit and
> > centered around people more than activity.
> 
> Yes, after considering different possibilities I decided to focus on 
> code contributions.
> 
> And yes, there is a lot of stress put on people. This is a community 
> project and I personally think that the key metrics should focus on the 
> population of this community. Having more & better contributors should 
> eventually lead to having more & better software. The WMF can influence 
> directly the amount of code produced by hiring more developers, but 
> growing the community with volunteers is more tricky and this is why it 
> is worth to look at the related data closely.
> 
> Then again, it is also true that it would be useful to know e.g. LOC 
> contributed in the past quarter/year by the WMF, independents and other 
> orgs. But maybe this could be integrated to "Who is contributing merged 
> code each quarter"?

Ok!

> 
> 
> > Any thoughts about the other data sources?
> 
> Out of code contributions, the only candidate to become a KPI that came 
> to mind was the effectiveness responding to Bugzilla reports. Maybe you 
> are right the priority of this one is higher than the age of code 
> contributors. Thoughts?
> 
> > From git, the commits metrics
> > is a bit rough, but combining it with SLOC and files, is a good
> > indicator of activity in the development. Also the tendencies for this
> > metrics (week, month and year) are a good indicator of how the project
> > is evolving. For example, last period of 365 days indicators points out
> > that in general, the activity is growing in Wikimedia projects:
> >
> > http://korma.wmflabs.org/browser/scm.html
> > 63% in commits, 159% in authors and 103% in files.
> >
> > Taking a look to this metrics, why commits are growing less than
> > authors? Thinking in the metrics and tendencies and relations, we can
> > reach pretty interesting questions to understanding in deep how
> > Wikimedia development is going.
> 
> Yes, but we have to keep the initial list of KPIs short.

Sure! I just want to be sure that the complete scenario was analyzed. It
is great to have a list of KPIs short so we can concentrate in them. 


>  Data about 
> activity growth is good but it is slightly visible from the surface 
> already. The KPIs proposed are less evident, more underground. They 
> should be report the health of our project by sensing its foundations.
> 
> 
> > Taking a look to ITS, one metric that I think we are missing is
> > *pending* issues (open issues but not closed). And this concept is
> > something that could be applied to other data sources: the pending work
> > to be done.
> >
> > Tendencies and pending are two areas in which we can find interesting
> > metrics that could evolve to KPIs.
> >
> > In ITS we have also the time to close evolution for the 99% of tickets,
> > 95% of them, 50% and 25%. "Time to" is always a good SLA (Service Level
> > Agreement) indicator and at the end, SLA is a strategic position for the
> > community.
> 
> Yes, see my comment about about effectiveness responding to Bugzilla 
> feedback. The pending work in Gerrit is already reflected in the KPIs 
> proposed.
> 
> 
> > In MLS with the current metrics, we can see that around 50% messages
> > generate a thread (has some response), and for example, and interesting
> > metric is that each person send 20 messages (ratio between total
> > messages and senders). So in general, mailing list have feedback and
> > people participate with several messages. Here the "Time to" shows that
> > 95% of messages are attended in less 20 days and that the time to
> > attention has grown last year. The care of the mailing lists is going
> > down?
> >
> > In demographics we can see pretty good information about all data
> > sources community. Mailing list members are going down also (mailing
> > lists are used less? where is the support of the projects moving on?),
> 
> Data about mailing lists, IRC and even wikis is good to have but I'm not 
> sure they are key. These channels support the real deal: code 
> repostories (and Bugzilla too). For instance, a % of discussions that 
> happen now on Gerrit probably took place before at wikitech-l.

Ok, so MLS and IRC will be fixed at its current state. And SCR will be
merged with SCM in code contributions panel.

> 
> 
> > SCM new members are also going down but ITS members are growing. The
> > software products start to be mature and more work is centered around
> > quality?
> 
> http://korma.wmflabs.org/browser/demographics.html
> 
> That peak in SCM birth 12-15 months ago might be related to the move 
> from SVN to Git + a peak of WMF hiring. The numbers in the past year 
> more than double any number of newcomers before.
> 
> The usage of Bugzilla has been clearly growing in the past year, both in 
> terms of new and regular users. Probably one of the causes is that we 
> are releasing more code, sooner and more often, and our dev teams and 
> dedicated bugmaster are succeeding selling Bugzilla as main feedback 
> channel.
> 
> But we are digressing.  :)  Let's go back to the 5-6 KPIs that we really 
> want to see. Any new proposal should include the KPI that would displace.

Great!!!!

Cheers

> 
> >> Please have your say. I will be updating
> >> http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Community_metrics#Key_metrics following
> >> the discussion.
> 
> 


-- 
|\_____/| Alvaro del Castillo
 [o] [o]  [email protected] - CTO, Software Engineer
 |  V  |  http://www.bitergia.com
  |   |
-ooo-ooo-


_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Reply via email to