[yocto-ab] YP Advisory Board: raw metrics

Tue Oct 24 00:53:36 PDT 2017

Thanks - I'll remove contrib and will send the repo list around to interested parties for review

Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S7, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone

-------- Original message --------
From: akuster <akuster at mvista.com>
Date: 10/24/17 9:50 AM (GMT+01:00)
To: Nicolas Dechesne <nicolas.dechesne at linaro.org>, Jeff Osier-Mixon <jefro at jefro.net>
Cc: yocto-ab at yoctoproject.org
Subject: Re: [yocto-ab] YP Advisory Board: raw metrics

On 10/24/2017 12:36 AM, Nicolas Dechesne wrote:
hi Jeff,

thanks for showing this and sharing the link.

If we take a look at the top repo, we see

[Inline              image 1]

Commits are counted once (of course), and since several of these trees are 'combined' together, most commits end up (wrongly?) in poky-contrib. We probably want to show that in a different way. I can guess that the trees are processed in a specific 'order' and that each commit is attributed to a repo when it is first met. So that means that the ordered list we provide is important, and we need to decide how we want to look at the data.

There are 2 possible orders (for the main repo):
1. poky
2. bitbake
3. oe-core
4. meta-yocto
5. *-contrib

or

1. oe-core
2. bitbake
3. meta-yocto
4. poky
5. *-contrib

Contrib is a stagging location for many developers and that code may or may not end up in the repos they support. I would drop *-contrib all together.

- Armin

Both options should give different views. Based on the structure of our development process, I suppose that the 2nd one makes more sense.

Some additional questions:

* Can we choose which branches in repo are processed? At the very least -next branches should not be taken into account.
* Should we try to track only 'release' branches as much as possible
* Isn't poky-buildhistory irrelevant here? I think we should remove it
* Should we keep the -contrib trees?
* can you share the whole list of repo that are being used?

cheers
nico

On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 7:55 AM, Jeff Osier-Mixon <jefro at jefro.net<mailto:jefro at jefro.net>> wrote:
These are the metrics links we discussed yesterday. Think of these as building blocks to provide data. Now we need to figure out good questions to ask to determine how to measure the health of the community. This will be an ongoing effort over the next quarter.

Bitergia is a company that LF has contracted with to provide metrics for all of their collaborative projects. Intel paid for additional data sets and support on behalf of the Yocto Project. Through these tools we have visualized data for the git repos, mailing lists, and bugzilla instance. These visualizations are highly configurable, and the whole setup is built with open source software.

https://yoctoproject.biterg.io

OpenHub is a BlackDuck project that provides a medium-depth dive into the git server.

https://www.openhub.net/p/YoctoProject

Now that we have these tools, I look forward to working with those interested on customizing the data set definitions so we know exactly what we are looking at.

--
Jeff Osier-Mixon - Open Source Community Manager, Intel Corporation

--
_______________________________________________
yocto-ab mailing list
yocto-ab at yoctoproject.org<mailto:yocto-ab at yoctoproject.org>
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto-ab

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto-ab/attachments/20171024/2ed9b36d/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 18740 bytes
Desc: image.png
URL: <http://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto-ab/attachments/20171024/2ed9b36d/attachment-0001.png>