Elijah Newren | 2 Jan 01:05 2005
Picon

Bugzilla statistics

Hi,

I thought others might be interested in some bugzilla statistics from
2003 and 2004.  There are at least a couple small problems in either
the scripts or in the consistency of the database, so some of these
statistics might be off slightly (a percentage point or two), but should
be pretty reliable.

Also, note that some Gnome or Gnome-related applications are found in
other databases outside bugzilla.gnome.org.  (Evolution is one major
example, though they are working to import it into Gnome bugzilla)

Overall statistics:
  Current open reports: 13395 (*)
  Opened in 2003/2004:  60334
  Closed in 2003/2004:  54232

  Of the bugs closed, 8421 were duplicates.

  Patches submitted:             13101
  Number of those reviewed (**): 11722 (89.5%)

  (*): Excludes reports marked as enhancements

  (**): Since we were using such an old version of bugzilla for so
        long, it appears that people still occasionally follow old
        habits and don't update patch statuses when commenting on
        patches.  Thus many patches have been reviewed but aren't
        counted here.  Also, many patches in open bugs from before the
        upgrade do not yet have a status set.  We do still have plenty
(Continue reading)

Wayne Schuller | 2 Jan 03:34 2005
Picon

Re: Bugzilla statistics

hi Elijah,

On Sat, 2005-01-01 at 17:05 -0700, Elijah Newren wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I thought others might be interested in some bugzilla statistics from
> 2003 and 2004.  There are at least a couple small problems in either
> the scripts or in the consistency of the database, so some of these
> statistics might be off slightly (a percentage point or two), but should
> be pretty reliable.

Great reporting!

Can you put your report permanently in the bugsquad section of the web
site?

thanks,
wayne
Elijah Newren | 2 Jan 03:55 2005
Picon

Re: Bugzilla statistics

Hi Wayne,

On Sun, 02 Jan 2005 13:34:13 +1100, Wayne Schuller
<k_wayne <at> schuller.id.au> wrote:
> On Sat, 2005-01-01 at 17:05 -0700, Elijah Newren wrote:
> > I thought others might be interested in some bugzilla statistics from
> > 2003 and 2004.  There are at least a couple small problems in either
> > the scripts or in the consistency of the database, so some of these
> > statistics might be off slightly (a percentage point or two), but should
> > be pretty reliable.
> 
> Great reporting!
> 
> Can you put your report permanently in the bugsquad section of the web
> site?

Yeah, I'd like to do that.  Didn't you do a similar report at the end
of 2002?  I'm sure I remembering seeing such a report but when I went
looking I couldn't find it.  It'd like to stick them both up.  Also,
thanks for the weekly-bug-summary script and many other bugzilla
scripts you wrote.  :-)

Elijah
Matt T. Proud | 2 Jan 05:11 2005
Picon

Re: Bugzilla statistics

Hello,

Out of curiosity, are there any rankings concerning counts of 
individuals who submitted the most number of bugs? Moreover, out of 
that, are there any chronic duplicate bug submitters? ;-)

Best of regards,

Matt T. Proud

Elijah Newren wrote:

>Hi Wayne,
>
>On Sun, 02 Jan 2005 13:34:13 +1100, Wayne Schuller
><k_wayne <at> schuller.id.au> wrote:
>  
>
>>On Sat, 2005-01-01 at 17:05 -0700, Elijah Newren wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>I thought others might be interested in some bugzilla statistics from
>>>2003 and 2004.  There are at least a couple small problems in either
>>>the scripts or in the consistency of the database, so some of these
>>>statistics might be off slightly (a percentage point or two), but should
>>>be pretty reliable.
>>>      
>>>
>>Great reporting!
>>
(Continue reading)

David Neary | 2 Jan 16:31 2005
Picon

GUADEC call for papers - final reminder

Hi all,

There are now only 10 days left until the closing date for
abstracts for GUADEC 2005 in Stuttgart at the end of May.

So now would be a great time to work the Christmas calories out
of your forearms and fingers by writing an abstract, a few short
lines about yourself, and sending the whole lot, with a nice
photo, to guadec-papers <at> gnome.org

We will let people know pretty quickly whether their papers are
accepted or not this year, with some luck and a following wind.

Full details of the call for papers are available at
http://2005.guadec.org/papers.html and more details about GUADEC
in general are at http://2005.guadec.org/ 

Thanks for your time! Happy abstracting, and a happy new year,

Dave.
Elijah Newren | 2 Jan 22:33 2005
Picon

Re: Bugzilla statistics

I think this might be good to tell everyone...

On Sun, 02 Jan 2005 13:29:08 -0500, Havoc Pennington <hp <at> redhat.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 2005-01-01 at 17:05 -0700, Elijah Newren wrote:
> > People who have closed more than 1000 bugs in the last two years:
> >
> >   1659    mclasen redhat com
> >   1582    sven gimp org
> >   1541    yaneti declera com
> >   1445    hadess hadess net
> >   1322    gnome flowerday cx
> >   1280    vincent vuntz net
> >   1244    martin wehner epost de
> >   1235    daniel veillard com
> >   1175    vincent noel gmail com
> >   1173    otaylor redhat com
> >   1135    chpe gnome org
> 
> What are the criteria for a bug to be in this list? From what you
> mentioned you tried to exclude triage and only include cases where the
> person fixed the bug?

Each person's total is the number of bugs that they marked as either
resolved or closed during 2003 or 2004.  We have no way of
differentiating between simple triaging and actual bug fixing.

Elijah
Elijah Newren | 3 Jan 02:28 2005
Picon

Re: Bugzilla statistics

On Sun, 02 Jan 2005 13:34:13 +1100, Wayne Schuller
<k_wayne <at> schuller.id.au> wrote:

> Can you put your report permanently in the bugsquad section of the web
> site?

http://developer.gnome.org/projects/bugsquad/statistics/

Cheers,
Elijah
Elijah Newren | 3 Jan 23:07 2005
Picon

bug-buddy and your frequently duplicated bugs (how to reduce your bugzilla spam!)

The list of bugs that bug-buddy shows has been woefully out-of-date
for a long time.  So, instead of using the manual method of requiring
people to add the bugbuddy keyword to bugs, we now instead
automatically generate a list of the 20 bugs that have been the most
frequently duplicated in the last month.

Unfortunately, there's one thing we can't automate: setting the
Summary of such bugs to something meaningful for bug-buddy users.  We
(the bugsquad) will try to look out for bugs that need retitling, but
(a) maintainers may be better suited to summarizing some bugs, and (b)
we didn't seem to do so well with the bugbuddy keyword so I'm not so
confident we'll be on top of this either.

So please take a look at any frequently duplicated bugs you may have
and try to set the title to something useful for bug-buddy users.  You
can find a list of the most duplicated bugs in the last month at
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/reports/recent-mostfrequent.cgi -- many of
which could use improved summaries.  (For the curious: bug-buddy just
uses the top 20 from this report; however, unlike this report,
bug-buddy shows the product and component but doesn't show the number
of duplicates, status, or resolution).

Cheers,
Elijah
Wayne Schuller | 4 Jan 01:34 2005
Picon

Re: bug-buddy and your frequently duplicated bugs (how to reduce your bugzilla spam!)

hi,

Thanks Elijah for your hard work.

Something I tried to do when setting up the mostfrequent/bugbuddy
interface, was try to get bug buddy to append the report to the most
frequent bug (and add the reporter to the cc list for the bug), rather
than discourage submitting anything for a popular duplicate bug.

At the time, I couldn't get bugzilla or its interface to do this.

Maybe this is possible with the new gnome bugzilla?

If this could work, it would mean that people COULD submit their report
for a highly duplicate bug, but all the info would go in the one report,
and people working on the bug would have an immediate audience of people
suffering from the bug to interact with.

Duplicate bug reports are actually useful data, we just need to allow
them to not cause inordinate time to triage or administrate.

Of course I am too busy to help with this. :)

thanks,
wayne

On Mon, 2005-01-03 at 15:07 -0700, Elijah Newren wrote:
> The list of bugs that bug-buddy shows has been woefully out-of-date
> for a long time.  So, instead of using the manual method of requiring
> people to add the bugbuddy keyword to bugs, we now instead
(Continue reading)

Havoc Pennington | 4 Jan 02:49 2005
Picon

Re: bug-buddy and your frequently duplicated bugs (how to reduce your bugzilla spam!)

Hi,

Somewhat unrelated, but I have to ask - with 94625, am I responsible for
the most-duplicated bug ever and by what margin? ;-)

2 years ago I screw up and still 7 dups in the last month!

Havoc

Gmane