Phabricator monthly statistics - 2018-07

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
8 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Phabricator monthly statistics - 2018-07

communitymetrics

Hi Community Metrics team,

This is your automatic monthly Phabricator statistics mail.

Accounts created in (2018-07): 293
Active Maniphest users (any activity) in (2018-07): 912
Task authors in (2018-07): 473
Users who have closed tasks in (2018-07): 325

Projects which had at least one task moved from one column to another on
their workboard in (2018-07): 294

Tasks created in (2018-07): 2315
Tasks closed in (2018-07): 4020
Open and stalled tasks in total: 38936

Median age in days of open tasks by priority:

Unbreak now: 6
Needs Triage: 420
High: 738
Normal: 965
Low: 1261
Lowest: 1222

(How long tasks have been open, not how long they have had that priority)

Active Differential users (any activity) in (2018-07): 21

TODO: Numbers which refer to closed tasks might not be correct, as
described in https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T1003 .

Yours sincerely,
Fab Rick Aytor

(via community_metrics.sh on phab1001 at Wed Aug  1 09:39:50 UTC 2018)

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Phabricator monthly statistics - 2018-07

Pine W
Thanks for the updated statistics. I wonder, was there ever an agreement on
how to standardize the definitions for priorities, such as "unbreak now"
and "high"? The reason that I ask is that a median age of 738 days for
"high" priority tasks seems very long. I would hope that we would not take
two years to complete "high" priority tasks.

Thanks,

Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )

On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 9:39 AM, <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Hi Community Metrics team,
>
> This is your automatic monthly Phabricator statistics mail.
>
> Accounts created in (2018-07): 293
> Active Maniphest users (any activity) in (2018-07): 912
> Task authors in (2018-07): 473
> Users who have closed tasks in (2018-07): 325
>
> Projects which had at least one task moved from one column to another on
> their workboard in (2018-07): 294
>
> Tasks created in (2018-07): 2315
> Tasks closed in (2018-07): 4020
> Open and stalled tasks in total: 38936
>
> Median age in days of open tasks by priority:
>
> Unbreak now: 6
> Needs Triage: 420
> High: 738
> Normal: 965
> Low: 1261
> Lowest: 1222
>
> (How long tasks have been open, not how long they have had that priority)
>
> Active Differential users (any activity) in (2018-07): 21
>
> TODO: Numbers which refer to closed tasks might not be correct, as
> described in https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T1003 .
>
> Yours sincerely,
> Fab Rick Aytor
>
> (via community_metrics.sh on phab1001 at Wed Aug  1 09:39:50 UTC 2018)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Phabricator monthly statistics - 2018-07

Gergo Tisza
On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 8:14 PM Pine W <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Thanks for the updated statistics. I wonder, was there ever an agreement on
> how to standardize the definitions for priorities, such as "unbreak now"
> and "high"? The reason that I ask is that a median age of 738 days for
> "high" priority tasks seems very long. I would hope that we would not take
> two years to complete "high" priority tasks.
>

The median age of open priority X tasks is not the same as the median time
it takes to complete priority X tasks.
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Phabricator monthly statistics - 2018-07

Pine W
Hi Gergo,

I understand that it might take 2 hours to complete a priority X task that
has been open for 2 years, but depending on the definition of "high"
priority, it seems to me that the median high priority task should be open
for fewer than 2 years.

Maybe this is a complex enough topic that it would be better discussed
during one of the regular technology office hours. Do you have a suggestion
about which office hour would be most appropriate, if you think that an
office hour would be a good venue for a discussion?

Thanks,

Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )

On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 6:49 PM, Gergo Tisza <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 8:14 PM Pine W <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the updated statistics. I wonder, was there ever an agreement
> on
> > how to standardize the definitions for priorities, such as "unbreak now"
> > and "high"? The reason that I ask is that a median age of 738 days for
> > "high" priority tasks seems very long. I would hope that we would not
> take
> > two years to complete "high" priority tasks.
> >
>
> The median age of open priority X tasks is not the same as the median time
> it takes to complete priority X tasks.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Phabricator monthly statistics - 2018-07

Stas Malyshev
In reply to this post by Gergo Tisza
Hi!

>> and "high"? The reason that I ask is that a median age of 738 days for
>> "high" priority tasks seems very long. I would hope that we would not take
>> two years to complete "high" priority tasks.
>>
>
> The median age of open priority X tasks is not the same as the median time
> it takes to complete priority X tasks.

Yes, it looks more the case of "we thought it's a high priority task but
turned out it's not" rather than "we take a long time to do high
priority tasks". I.e. maybe we need to have some rules around removing
tasks from "High" if it's clear we're not doing it anytime soon.

--
Stas Malyshev
[hidden email]

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Phabricator monthly statistics - 2018-07

Gergo Tisza
On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 10:42 PM Stas Malyshev <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Yes, it looks more the case of "we thought it's a high priority task but
> turned out it's not" rather than "we take a long time to do high
> priority tasks". I.e. maybe we need to have some rules around removing
> tasks from "High" if it's clear we're not doing it anytime soon.
>

More generally, if 10% of your high priority tasks take a year to finish,
and 90% take a day, the median open task age will be around half a year
(even though the median time to finish a task is a day). It's not really a
useful measure.
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Phabricator monthly statistics - 2018-07

Bryan Davis
In reply to this post by Pine W
On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 2:03 PM, Pine W <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Gergo,
>
> I understand that it might take 2 hours to complete a priority X task that
> has been open for 2 years, but depending on the definition of "high"
> priority, it seems to me that the median high priority task should be open
> for fewer than 2 years.
>
> Maybe this is a complex enough topic that it would be better discussed
> during one of the regular technology office hours. Do you have a suggestion
> about which office hour would be most appropriate, if you think that an
> office hour would be a good venue for a discussion?

It is also not completely obvious, but useful to remember, that
phabricator.wikimedia.org is a shared service used by many
organizations, teams, and individuals participating in the Wikimedia
movement's technical spaces. This in turn means that there is no
canonical workflow, no single 'owner' of determining process and
procedure, and no simple way to measure trends.

Any patterns that any of us think we see in global aggregate numbers
such as those in this report should be taken with a whole handful of
salt rather than just a pinch. :) Think of this report the same way
you would think of a report by GitLab, BitBucket, or GitHub about
activity across all of their hosted projects and tracking boards.

Bryan
--
Bryan Davis              Wikimedia Foundation    <[hidden email]>
[[m:User:BDavis_(WMF)]] Manager, Technical Engagement    Boise, ID USA
irc: bd808                                        v:415.839.6885 x6855

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Phabricator monthly statistics - 2018-07

Pine W
 OK, it sounds like the fuzziness with prioritization, perhaps with the
exception of "unbreak now", isn't worth the effort to harmonize globally
because doing so would require nontrivial effort for questionable gain.
Thanks for clarifying.

Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l