gordon chung wrote: > On 08/04/2016 1:26 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: >> Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics: >> https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969 >> >> It's pretty clear what's happening if you look here: >> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/owner:openstack-infra%2540lists.openstack.org+status:open >> >> Here's the drastic step (i'd like to avoid): >> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/303545/ >> > > is it actually affecting anything in the community aside from the > reviews being useless. aside from the 'diversity' tags in governance, > does anything else use stackalytics? Although I feel like there has been less of that over the last few releases, Stackalytics is where the press (and some companies) point to to find out who the "#1 OpenStack company" is, or what a particular company rank is in the contributions list. On http://www.openstack.org/software/mitaka/ you can click "Contributor stats" which points to: http://stackalytics.com/?release=mitaka -- and by default this shows Reviews stats (which are the easiest to game). Maybe it's time to revert back to "Commits" as the default stat shown on Stackalytics ? At least for a while ? The only protection against metrics being gamed is to change them often enough... I'm also a big fan of original retrospective analysis, where you look at past data and find interesting metrics (rather than predefine a metric for future data and hope nobody will game it). -- Thierry Carrez (ttx)