hi,
is there a statistics about mediawiki developer productivity? i just fell over a couple of pages and i am quite impressed i must say: * gabriel, https://github.com/gwicke, 2'300 commits last year * jeroen, https://github.com/JeroenDeDauw, 3'700 commits a year * ori, https://github.com/atdt, 1'700 * james, https://github.com/jdforrester, 1'200 * yuri, https://github.com/nyurik, 900 * matt: https://github.com/mattflaschen, 400 commits
rupert
Perhaps some Working Wikipedian and Tireless Contributor barnstars are appropriate for that group!
Pine
On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 12:06 PM, rupert THURNER rupert.thurner@gmail.com wrote:
hi,
is there a statistics about mediawiki developer productivity? i just fell over a couple of pages and i am quite impressed i must say:
- gabriel, https://github.com/gwicke, 2'300 commits last year
- jeroen, https://github.com/JeroenDeDauw, 3'700 commits a year
- ori, https://github.com/atdt, 1'700
- james, https://github.com/jdforrester, 1'200
- yuri, https://github.com/nyurik, 900
- matt: https://github.com/mattflaschen, 400 commits
rupert
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Hi rupert,
I'm pretty sure http://korma.wmflabs.org/browser/scm.html and other pages of korma will give you some information. But keep in mind, that productivity doesn't only mean the number of commits, or the line of codes :)
Best, Florian
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Wikitech-l [mailto:wikitech-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] Im Auftrag von rupert THURNER Gesendet: Samstag, 2. April 2016 21:06 An: Wikimedia developers wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org Betreff: [Wikitech-l] productivity of mediawiki developers
hi,
is there a statistics about mediawiki developer productivity? i just fell over a couple of pages and i am quite impressed i must say: * gabriel, https://github.com/gwicke, 2'300 commits last year * jeroen, https://github.com/JeroenDeDauw, 3'700 commits a year * ori, https://github.com/atdt, 1'700 * james, https://github.com/jdforrester, 1'200 * yuri, https://github.com/nyurik, 900 * matt: https://github.com/mattflaschen, 400 commits
rupert
_______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Yeah. It would be interesting to have multiple measures of "productivity" for technical contributors, including code review.
Quim: is this something that's within Technical Collaboration's scope? If not, perhaps it's something that I could work on developing later this year.
Pine
On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 12:10 PM, Florian Schmidt < florian.schmidt.welzow@t-online.de> wrote:
Hi rupert,
I'm pretty sure http://korma.wmflabs.org/browser/scm.html and other pages of korma will give you some information. But keep in mind, that productivity doesn't only mean the number of commits, or the line of codes :)
Best, Florian
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Wikitech-l [mailto:wikitech-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] Im Auftrag von rupert THURNER Gesendet: Samstag, 2. April 2016 21:06 An: Wikimedia developers wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org Betreff: [Wikitech-l] productivity of mediawiki developers
hi,
is there a statistics about mediawiki developer productivity? i just fell over a couple of pages and i am quite impressed i must say:
- gabriel, https://github.com/gwicke, 2'300 commits last year
- jeroen, https://github.com/JeroenDeDauw, 3'700 commits a year
- ori, https://github.com/atdt, 1'700
- james, https://github.com/jdforrester, 1'200
- yuri, https://github.com/nyurik, 900
- matt: https://github.com/mattflaschen, 400 commits
rupert
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 10:13 PM, Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
Yeah. It would be interesting to have multiple measures of "productivity" for technical contributors, including code review.
Quim: is this something that's within Technical Collaboration's scope? If not, perhaps it's something that I could work on developing later this year.
The first question to answer is what information are you looking for when you want to measure developers' "productivity". What would be the motivation of that estimation? What is the motivation behind this thread?
2016-04-04 17:02 GMT+03:00 Quim Gil qgil@wikimedia.org:
The first question to answer is what information are you looking for when you want to measure developers' "productivity". What would be the motivation of that estimation? What is the motivation behind this thread?
One reason comes to me mind. My gut feeling is that we are not very good at consistently giving recognition for technical work. One possible reason is that we do not have clear and understandable metrics or promote those metrics enough. Nor am I aware of any process for awards and celebration (The Academy Awards would be an example in another context, also Wikipedian of the year).
As an example, I recall vaguely that during the Bugzilla times we used to have regular emails on wikitech-l with list of people who closed most bugs.
Having some metrics for different activities could stir up some healthy competition (also unhealthy if we are not careful) and of course there is a lot of important work that is not visible from the numbers only.
I am not expert on this subject, but I think developers (especially volunteers, but also others) are more likely to stick around if they feel that their work is recognized and appreciated. For the latter we already know that we should improve our code review process.
-Niklas
I agree we should give recognition and encouragement to devs, but I think there are other ways to do it we could think about besides sheer number of commits, +2s or lines modified.
I personally think that rewarding high numbers encourages quantity over quality (only big numbers are recognized) and also encourages a culture of hero developers[1] that is discouraging for casual or new volunteers and grows our silos bigger.
I, for example, value better good -1 code reviews (well written, thoughtful, and when you learn new things), rather than 10s of +2s, and for example IMO a reviewer price would be hand picked from nominations for this kind of reviews rather than automatically picked from top number of +2s.
[1]: There's always a small group of *heroes* that are highly productive because -besides them being great developers- of the background knowledge, familiarity with the code bases and other developers that are always going to be in the top of most these metrics. On Apr 4, 2016 5:22 PM, "Niklas Laxström" niklas.laxstrom@gmail.com wrote:
2016-04-04 17:02 GMT+03:00 Quim Gil qgil@wikimedia.org:
The first question to answer is what information are you looking for when you want to measure developers' "productivity". What would be the motivation of that estimation? What is the motivation behind this thread?
One reason comes to me mind. My gut feeling is that we are not very good at consistently giving recognition for technical work. One possible reason is that we do not have clear and understandable metrics or promote those metrics enough. Nor am I aware of any process for awards and celebration (The Academy Awards would be an example in another context, also Wikipedian of the year).
As an example, I recall vaguely that during the Bugzilla times we used to have regular emails on wikitech-l with list of people who closed most bugs.
Having some metrics for different activities could stir up some healthy competition (also unhealthy if we are not careful) and of course there is a lot of important work that is not visible from the numbers only.
I am not expert on this subject, but I think developers (especially volunteers, but also others) are more likely to stick around if they feel that their work is recognized and appreciated. For the latter we already know that we should improve our code review process.
-Niklas
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
I, for example, value better good -1 code reviews
Same here. There are statistics for -1 too, two clicks away from the link I provided in the previous message. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Gerrit/Reports/Code_review_activity
Nemo
I think a review is valuable no matter what the score... with the possible exception of -2 which I fear is probably a bit too aggressive and unnecessary in our ecosystem for which reason the reading web team agreed to avoid the use of -2 except to stop merges in progress that were not ready. I review with score 0 quite a lot for instance.
On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 3:59 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
I, for example, value better good -1 code reviews
Same here. There are statistics for -1 too, two clicks away from the link I provided in the previous message. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Gerrit/Reports/Code_review_activity
Nemo
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
I personally reserve -2 for "this is a fundamentally bad idea" or "this requires community consensus before being implemented". Anything that is fixable in the code should get a -1 or 0.
Btw, I personally prefer to get -1 reviews over 0 reviews, simply because it's easier to spot them as "todo" on the gerrit dashboard. If gerrit would highlight "stuff with new comments" more prominently, I'd probably use 0 more often.
Am 05.04.2016 um 16:18 schrieb Jon Robson:
I think a review is valuable no matter what the score... with the possible exception of -2 which I fear is probably a bit too aggressive and unnecessary in our ecosystem for which reason the reading web team agreed to avoid the use of -2 except to stop merges in progress that were not ready. I review with score 0 quite a lot for instance.
On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 3:59 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
I, for example, value better good -1 code reviews
Same here. There are statistics for -1 too, two clicks away from the link I provided in the previous message. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Gerrit/Reports/Code_review_activity
Nemo
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Hi!
I personally reserve -2 for "this is a fundamentally bad idea" or "this requires community consensus before being implemented". Anything that is fixable in the code should get a -1 or 0.
Btw, I personally prefer to get -1 reviews over 0 reviews, simply because it's easier to spot them as "todo" on the gerrit dashboard. If gerrit would highlight "stuff with new comments" more prominently, I'd probably use 0 more often.
I treat -1 as "this needs to be fixed before it can go in, but once it is fixed it's good". Agree on -2. I use 0 for just commenting on things where I do not feel qualified or entitled to review things but still have something to say, like additional todo items or general discussion. So, most reviews should be +1/-1.
Niklas puts it well. Analogously, in sports like baseball there are lots of statistics about players, coaches, teams, divisions, and leagues. Awards are given based strictly on quantities, as well as more subjectively on qualities for recognitions such as Rookie of the Year and Most Valuable Player.
Wikimedia technical development is a team sport, and that unlike on the content side of Wikipedia where there can be rival views, I think that on technical matters almost everyone collaborates toward compatible goals.
I've been thinking about how to ensure that *quality* is valued alongside *quantity*. We struggle do this balance well in the US health care system when we evaluate hospitals and doctors, and WMF stuggles to do this well when the Community Resources and Evaluation teams evaluate grant proposals and the performance of Wikimedia affiliates. I'm very interested in ideas about how to estimate the quality of contributions (including code review!) as well as the quantity of contributions.
Pine On Apr 4, 2016 08:22, "Niklas Laxström" niklas.laxstrom@gmail.com wrote:
2016-04-04 17:02 GMT+03:00 Quim Gil qgil@wikimedia.org:
The first question to answer is what information are you looking for when you want to measure developers' "productivity". What would be the motivation of that estimation? What is the motivation behind this thread?
One reason comes to me mind. My gut feeling is that we are not very good at consistently giving recognition for technical work. One possible reason is that we do not have clear and understandable metrics or promote those metrics enough. Nor am I aware of any process for awards and celebration (The Academy Awards would be an example in another context, also Wikipedian of the year).
As an example, I recall vaguely that during the Bugzilla times we used to have regular emails on wikitech-l with list of people who closed most bugs.
Having some metrics for different activities could stir up some healthy competition (also unhealthy if we are not careful) and of course there is a lot of important work that is not visible from the numbers only.
I am not expert on this subject, but I think developers (especially volunteers, but also others) are more likely to stick around if they feel that their work is recognized and appreciated. For the latter we already know that we should improve our code review process.
-Niklas
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On Sat, 2016-04-02 at 21:10 +0200, Florian Schmidt wrote:
I'm pretty sure http://korma.wmflabs.org/browser/scm.html and other pages of korma will give you some information.
For the records, in the meantime korma.wmflabs.org got replaced by https://wikimedia.biterg.io/ . Documentation is available at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Community_metrics#wikimedia.biterg.io
Cheers, andre
For statistics, see https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Development_statistics . As a starting point to look into what you call "productivity", I usually use: * https://www.openhub.net/orgs/wikimedia * http://koti.kapsi.fi/~federico/crstats/core.txt + http://koti.kapsi.fi/~federico/crstats/extensions.txt
Nemo
Lines added: Last 365 days: 20,176,017 Lines removed: Last 365 days: 14,378,469
Is this ^ right? Those are really big numbers!
On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 10:39 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
For statistics, see https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Development_statistics . As a starting point to look into what you call "productivity", I usually use:
http://koti.kapsi.fi/~federico/crstats/extensions.txt
Nemo
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org