CHAOSS Common Metrics Working Group, 21 Feb 2019

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: CHAOSS.Common.February.21.2019

Description

CHAOSS.Common.February.21.2019

A

Recording okay.

B

Okay and then the other action item was for Toby to file an issue and a link to a Google Doc with the organizational affiliation stuff. So that's um that's done.

B

Did I miss miss any action items from last time. No I, don't think so.

B

Okay, so so the next bit.

B

Sorry people are typing up in the agenda: let's, let's I just.

C

I just put it there so I wouldn't forget: okay, that's all I'm doing we're working our way through the agenda. I just wanted to put a marker there, okay I, would.

B

I'm gonna drop that down into the notes for the for that. Okay,.

B

B

Okay, so the orga filiation, so I've included in the minutes, there's a link to the issue that Toby put together and a link to the the document, so the the issue frankly just links off to the document. So there's not really much interesting in that bit. Right now did anybody? Did anybody contribute to this? This document that wants to to talk about it.

D

I'm, looking at the issue, I see that I had responded. She already forgot about it. I went through the long list of metrics that we had and added anything that we already had to here at the bottom, where it says related metrics listed.

C

So the other dimension here that I'm not seeing that I do know as significant is creation changing over time of individuals.

A

C

There is a point in time where individuals, you know you take your snapshot in time, but a lot of the projects I work on you know people will change with the new bus system. I'm certain we've seen this inside Linux.

C

They get dams to work. That is, there already has a notion of time windows associated with the organizations and standardizing on some of that type of how we track organization affiliation and time bounded I think, is something we should be looking at being able to capture people. Don't just look at metrics at a point in time. They also tend to look at trends in historical mm-hm.

B

A

Okay, I'll add that to the to the huge matrix list and I'll ping you on that one, it's really just about getting the name and kind of the definition slash question associated with it. That's it at the moment, yeah.

C

Yeah I make sure that, like I, say, Don and I have had discussions on this whole topic. Okay, for several years now, yeah I.

B

Would say, though, Matt instead of adding it to the list right now, let's, let's work in this in the stock sure just to keep things in one place so that we're not working on them and in both places, so I added it to their related. Oh um yeah, I'm just create a new category. I created a new category at the bottom called missing. Metrics yeah.

A

B

Can clean that up so so what else is missing.

E

Do you respect us, you were talking about this I. Remember we have some people working us, how its nature peer peer review or extreme programming, so several companies working at the same time or several developers pair.

C

Programming yep.

E

You're cramming.

C

Creations yeah specifically, in a case an example to think about, for that one is Lennar, oh, where they have my niece associated, and so they have their company and the potentially willin ro affiliation. And how does that get counted?.

B

The other, the other one is contractors.

C

Work-For-Hire, yes, yeah.

E

You're, an open source create clot fundraise, where I've seen this ad.

B

The pair programming.

E

And then we have found, but this is kind of tricky, depending on the day, two people that are affiliated to certain affiliations, but they want to be affiliated to another one. So have.

A

E

Are actually being paid by in a bateria, but then they want to be tracked as free silver foundation.

B

E

Chemical imitation, perhaps yeah.

C

So the question is: I think this dimension here, where people should be able to self provide input on their affiliations and metrics in some ways and be able to correct it and I. Certainly under GDP are types of issues down the road.

C

We may need to consider that too.

B

A

Anything in here about organizations that are Shepherds for the project kind of like at the at the core I know we have the elephant factor, but organizations that are really responsible for shepherding this project along is defined.

D

C

A

Variety of things.

C

Yeah I think the Kate the case there, where that might happen, is the project structures itself so that it puts a copyright into everyone. All you know. Anyone in this contributors file is effectively having a shared copyrights. They may want to be tracking things that way.

C

It's definitely a spectrum. The other factor I think to put into here is how to handle. If an organization changes over time, mergers, acquisitions, mm-hmm.

C

So there's a shifting dynamic on that dimension as well, so.

F

We've done mmm I guess in Sochi.

C

Who's lived through being increased, Motorola spun out to have freescale that then got a acquired by nxp and then went until the next period. A whole bunch of discussions with all.

F

You had to say was motorola.

D

So kate, if I can ask what did you mean with the project that structures copyright to share to cross contributors.

C

Best practices and copyright statements there's some evolving thoughts going on there, and certain projects will basically put a copyright statement on each file saying copyright contributors to this project. You know project X and then inside project X. There is a file called contributors and everyone, you know as they start contributing they get at it by their peers. Something like that.

C

D

C

What they may want themselves to be formally affiliated with the project rather than the companies are coming in from because we're doing this as community work or something like that, but you know Kay brace them back through their gmail and they have another account somewhere else. We know they're active. We might affiliate them with a company where they personally want to be affiliated with. As you know, Daniel says like FSF, as opposed to mature Chia. Okay,.

F

It seems like it seems like there are like three axes of control for this information when one might be. The standard that we want to stay is how we decide where people are doing. The work for the other might be the developers, preference and a third might be how a community manager wants to interpret affiliation, because I think I, understood in conversations different people see these affiliation things very differently like how I would affiliation.

E

There is my overthinking, yes, the receiving for go for a corner case where we we faced. For instance, we've been building some dashboards, some of the people paying for that were asking us. If there are certain organizations that are not.

E

Asking for certain services- or they are not aligned with whatever. Basically they don't want them to be part of the affiliation, so it's kind of, let's say a service, maybe from from the people paying for for dashboard. Just perhaps a fourth case that maybe someone the the one producing the matrix itself, but I didn't even make sense. You.

F

Don't know like a centralized service that would try to track affiliations across the broad collection of communities.

E

So not exactly said that the specific case was, if you are not paying for the services that we are offering. You will not be listed as organization here, so you know, but this is. This is basically a way of proceeding by the one producing the dashboard right or controlling the dashboard. So I mean from a pure metrics perspective. Maybe it doesn't make sense.

E

Grandpa, okay,.

E

So this is on top of your three yeah.

F

Yeah so I mean I, don't know if we wanna skate Don, deep thoughts on. Are these different types of ways of interpreting affiliation I'm doing oh? Do we just want to what do we wanted to find I guess, yeah.

B

So what I've done is I've created a section in the organizational affiliation metric stock called missing, metrics and I've just been listing listing all the ones that we've talked about so I think what we have to do first is probably make sure that we have all of the or as many of the metrics we can possibly think of, and then I think it'll actually be kind of a bigger exercise to look at some. Some focus areas related to organizational affiliation and put these into logical groupings.

B

B

Because I think I think what you just said is part of it, but I think it certainly doesn't encompass all of the stuff that we have here on the for the organizational affiliation metrics. We.

C

Definitely should make sure we stress that it's an organization rather than a company yeah and because I think organizations play our the role here that wanna capture companies are just a subset. Companies have multiple sub branches, and things like that too. So I don't know to what extent you want to know wholly owned subsidiaries and secondary subsidiaries, and that type of thing that's.

B

B

So somebody tucked in at the bottom of this list, contributor organizations listing and not as part of affiliation I, don't know what that means.

D

Oh I think there was what Daniel what was talking about if you don't get listed or your company doesn't get listed if you're, not officially a member or paying for the service that.

C

Was my attempt to captured what Daniel was saying? Okay,.

B

Okay, are we missing missing anything else, so.

A

Does anybody I guess this is the point I was trying to bring up earlier? I, don't see it captured here, but in a khadeem a big one is core versus peripheral members. This shows up in academia all the time.

A

So does anybody care- and this is that whole shepherding yeah, but you can have an organization kind of a Peter as a large contributor over a brief period of time, but they're not really a committed member to a project right, so you could have a lot of code being dumped in a short period of time, so the number of commits might be high, but they really might just be a peripheral organization that made a a temporary entry into the core right. So do we care it? Does anybody care about this?

A

This is all over a khadeem about core and peripheral structures. Yeah.

F

I've written a lot of papers using that analysis and I think I think it's a question of so the challenge is in open source has been what you're gonna count as core carry and if you want to show that without vetting it first, because the core is usually determined by communication acts, so the people who are most engaged in specific acts of communication often end up defined as being in the core and usually that's right. Sometimes you get it. It's not quite right, there's, obviously thresholds that have to be on a project-by-project basis.

F

So it's it's less absolute or it's it's more it'll. You know, but signing somebody, a category automatically well I think people would be interested in that I think there might be bristling against it too.

D

I'm not familiar with this concept. King, you can't give me an example. What you mean by quorum prefer on academia and and.

B

Related to that, are you talking about core and peripheral organizations or corn, peripheral individuals who work in.

F

B

F

Talking about individuals, okay, so.

B

Is that even an organizational affiliation work.

A

Done on the organizational level where they yeah yeah that it, it is a factor if.

F

You well yeah all.

B

Right, let's back up and answer Brian's question so.

F

If you imagine just a associate Graham, have you seen a sociogram Brian like social network analysis? Okay, so sure? So it's like a lot of dots and the people who in the middle are tightly connected and.

A

F

The people outside are kind of the periphery. Sometimes you have two clusters in a project and the people who go between them are called bridging people and I can I can shoot out some examples. No.

D

I I think I've got it in my head now. um Does that apply in this situation, because we kind of call those I mean so like if I wrong in thinking that this is similar to what we would call a drive-by contribution.

D

A

It could be so a peripheral member could make a drive-by contribution right kind of where temporarily, they kind of shoot up the list. Sorry.

D

My my flip to that is, would a peripheral person or organization be making continual contributions possible? Okay, because that, obviously it's different from what I'm thinking, okay, yep.

A

So it's really and you can like Sean, was saying you can kind of slice. This a variety of ways: yeah.

B

In terms of how.

A

You would define a core member I mean it might be things like trying to identify if one organization kind of occupies all maintainer slots in a project right and they are responsible for approving all pull requests say that they take a position of quarry, so it could be defined in a.

D

A

Of different ways, I.

D

Just yeah and I could see this being useful because first I'm sort of like why? Why, because like? If we're talking about like private organizations like a company, the dividing line is pretty easy. Either you get a paycheck or you don't mm-hmm, so that that definitions pretty easy, but I could also see an intra organizational analysis are most of the people contributing to this project from a certain team or they're people from the outside who have been chipping in as well. So you know, I can see where I could lay both ways. Okay, thank you.

D

B

Okay, so I sort of summarized this as roll slash, Network structures relative to organizations in parentheses, core slash, periphery, maintainer x' and other leaders centralized in certain orgs in.

E

In the same way that we have these, so you remember these onion analysis of different source communities or we have most of the people. No small amount of the people are doing most work, so we can basically characterize organizations in the same way. So probably small amount of the various nations are doing a big amount of the work. So we can have this core really similar to this, but just characterize in organizations right activity in the several data sources- and this is another thing, so we are talking. Oh well, I've only seen and sorry.

E

This is my first meeting, so we have two already discussed about this, but we are talking about commits around the document, but there are, of course, any a lot of data sources and different data sources. So on top of this, I have a couple of extra here's, a pie, I, don't know if they apply here so.

B

E

It is okay, but you say so. This is the use case. Is this one? Are organizations being fair in the code review, so is the code review for, of course, they've several organizations, because there are organizations that are probably leaving this and they are? They are the ones that have maintained errs or code reviewers and the code reviewers are the ones that are adding the functionality at the very end. So what do you think is something that we can have here? You.

B

Know I'm adding a section called bigger things to think about: okay,.

A

B

Towards the top, because I think in some of these I think we maybe need to better neat, we need to figure out how we want to distinguish between metrics that are describing organizational affiliation and metrics that are using that to do something else. You know what I mean, because I think Daniel is like your your example is not really a centrally an organizational affiliation metric you're, taking the organizational affiliation metrics and doing some analysis on them.

B

Yes and I think we need to decide whether or not those been in this category or somewhere else, because I think that there are probably a lot of metrics that use organizational affiliation or additional analysis like.

E

I'm Courtney.

D

Fairness almost leads into the DNI. What group is for yeah.

B

E

You think you for the notes.

B

I'm just typing this in here.

E

And then our another similar concept Ricky these would be the footprint or the influence, but it's probably something based once we have the characterization of companies, then we can go for for something else in this year,.

B

Yeah, that's good point. I think it does fit into kind of that same category. So I summarized this as which metrics are directly related to organizational affiliation versus other metrics that use organizational affiliation for additional analysis. Then we need to decide where we put these and how we characterize them.

B

Cool anything else be look at the gut that we're missing.

A

This seems like a pretty good first pass. There does yeah.

B

It's plenty plenty of stuff to dig in dig into on this.

B

Now, as far as next steps.

A

B

Maybe you're gonna answer.

A

It in next steps you had so it was about focus areas and where they slot in yeah.

B

That was actually my, so I think is the next step. It would be nice to have somebody take a first pass at putting these in some focus areas. So maybe somebody has done this for D and B or D and I, who wants to take a look at these and see if we can put together some kind of a proposal so.

A

I'm on this yeah.

B

A

So though, as you well know, I, just the focus areas it would sound like would be a slightly bit different here, just in the sense that obviously BNI is the highest level working group with say six or seven focus areas in there and then obvious are the goals and the questions in there. So what would common be the highest level here and then a focus area is called organizational affiliate or organizational things whatever the proper name.

F

For that metrics.

A

Within there, or is there another layer in there.

B

That's a really good question: I was I was thinking of the focus area as being organizational affiliation, but I also think that we somehow need to better organize these metrics within that focus area. Okay,.

A

B

Not sure if we have like subcategories within it, because I was thinking there are some of these that are really closely related. So you have things like.

B

You know, for example, mergers and acquisitions and.

A

B

Kind of kind of related to like how do you handle subsidiaries, the same organization, they're kind of like you know how to handle when the organization structure changes mm-hmm, those might, you might think of those kind of kind of together and then there's sort of the pair programming, multiple affiliation contractors, personal preference, some of the some of those kind of naturally sort of grouped together, I, don't know I mean, maybe we just want to so.

D

I looking at this list, it seems to me like they're all factors when determining affiliation for the country material. These are all things to keep in mind. Ya know that they're different focus areas that the pro players elsewhere. You.

B

Know, I would say sorry I would say it's under the affiliation organizational affiliation focus area like that would be the focus area, but I'm just wondering because these, because we have so many metrics, do we want to organize them within that focus area.

A

We could be really subtle. Just in terms of you know how the focus areas have the tables yeah, the metrics and the questions. It could just be really subtle in terms of some headings almost in the table, yeah.

B

Or maybe we don't need to further organize it at all.

A

Possibility to and just let people assemble them the way that they would like to assemble them. Yeah.

B

A

Being the metrics yeah.

B

Do people have a preference, I mean I, don't really I, don't know that I do.

A

My if I had a preference, it would be a single focus area called organizational affiliation. Okay, it houses all metrics without us without a sub category, at least that first pass. Okay,.

B

A

But that's just me: yeah.

A

It really the only rationale, for that is just keeping it in line with the other working order. That's the biggest biggest factor for me.

D

I think I spot two different aspects: you one is how to be handle changes over time and the other is for to be handled under Christian contributor preference.

A

And then what is that for different, like some categories.

D

All of these concerns for determining affiliations, there's work. That seems to be worried about what, if affiliation changes, because it gets merged, quiet or people move jobs, but I'm gonna and the other is what, if people have more than one affiliation and want to be affiliated with a specific project, work, company or organization.

A

F

A

For you and try to determine if there are some categories so right, what what are these I understand? What you're saying, but what are these two items? Changes in.

D

A

D

D

B

Then we also so those are just in the missing metrics. We also have the the related metrics up above so the number of contributing organizations contributor diversity, some of those as well.

D

They fall into what you determined, above as one determining what affiliation is, and the other one using that affiliation in analysis.

B

D

I think what we have as missing metrics is: how do we actually determine if any issue, whereas all the others are? How do we use that? The finish once it's determined to analyze the data.

B

Okay am I the only.

D

One who sees that I.

A

Mean I can see it I just I guess this is to the question of do. We need subcategories to me I.

B

Do think what we probably want to do since Toby was kind of driving some of this effort, and he couldn't make the meeting I think before we decide what to do I think maybe we should sink back up with with Toby. Let him read the notes or possibly.

E

B

Watch the the video and see if he has any thoughts sounds.

A

Like a good idea, I'm.

C

Gonna have to drop off right now, but I just didn't want to see if people thought that geography or graphic affiliation was the topic to be included in this drama group as well. I.

B

C

Guys start talking about it now that I serve no Seagal did I thought. That was something that it's probably worth exploring dimensions. I would say if we go back as well and if there's a like open Google ad in there to the.

D

Dni work group is also tracking.

C

B

From what's what standpoint sorry I know, Kate has to leave.

B

Well, let's just table it so.

C

The problem or the interesting issue, I'm seeing and I'm seeing a lot of contributors from Australia but I, know they're coming in from China they're tumbling in and being able to track them more than just the server their prime court actually track. Where they're really affiliated with is the interesting case. I've been seeing.

D

B

You see that a lot too with because of the way corporate VPNs work, the Bay Area way: over-represented yep, you know data wise, so there's a lot to think about with respect to how we, how we handle Geographic, metrics I, think more so than the D at the DNI.

B

Looking at it from a diversity standpoint. Okay, now I think I understand where you're going with that. So, let's uh okay.

D

B

B

So I think I think the action item on the organizational affiliation is for Toby to take a look at the the work that we've done and sync up in the next in the next meeting. I think it's probably the action item.

B

Okay, so the next bit, sorry, who was who was taking notes to somebody, want to add the action item for for Toby.

D

B

B

So, thank you so much Matt for going through and.

B

Putting the working groups in there sure I think I think what I'll do. Let me music to computers. Let me share my screen for the.

B

Let me just find it.

B

Okay, so can you see that.

E

B

What I thought we would do is.

B

Have a quick look, a quick, quick look at these million metrics and see if there were any any that we wanted to focus on and is its geographic in here? Did anybody search for it? Remember.

A

It doesn't I think.

D

It's not, but we do have and again I work with dimensions and.

A

We have under contributor. Demographics is the only mention of location.

B

Yeah I, don't remember seeing it as a metric. It's.

A

B

Contributor demographics.

A

Is the metric yeah.

B

A

Then the description includes location, yeah,.

B

Yeah, the other one, that's not in this list and it's related to.

B

Geographic affiliation also is.

B

Time zones- sorry I was just reading the notes. I don't think we tabled the discussion on Geographic affiliation, I think we said that it belonged here because it's different than sorry I'm, just gonna, fix the notes. I think it's like Matt said we're tracking it as one one thing.

B

Okay, people are typing things in the notes that we haven't actually talked about. I was just going to put time zones and because I think that's an element of geographical affiliation. I mean.

A

I, don't I, don't think that's anywhere in there yeah.

B

I, don't either I.

B

Want to change the notes to sync with the DNI working group on it, but I, don't think geographical, so somebody.

D

Typed in location.

B

Region country, do you want to talk about what you mean, what you meant by that yeah.

D

That is one of the dimensions of demographics that the genogram, who has severe describing this information, but we have not specified a metric that actually uses this information. Okay,.

B

Yeah, because this seems to me like something that's important for a lot of things beyond DNI and so I think it probably belongs in the common working group and then Dee and I would use this data as a part of some metric. That's related to you know, diversity of something.

B

How I see that.

B

Does anybody? This is a pretty big list that we've got and there are a lot of a lot of gaps.

B

A

There are a lot of repeats too, or at least really similar metrics.

B

A

I was going through this list.

E

In the meantime, I have a question so yeah.

A

E

The following I mean I've, seen at the very beginning that there is a link to the, but she maturity model yeah, but you material model guidelines, processing the maturity of a brilliant I'd like we, we tried to make kind of list of existing models cuz. There are several of them, I, don't know if it even makes sense here in this discussion, because at least I'm aware of so polar seas, maturity model which is part of the Eclipse Foundation.

E

There were some R&D projects here in the European Union as well at work dealing with this.

E

So this concept of quality models or maturity models do we want to get into them or we simply cannot the middle.

A

So you're suggesting, like kind of building a maturity model, no.

E

A

What's out there.

E

Yeah yeah, basically that one it's kind of a state of the art in terms of well. These are the models we have related to open source projects.

E

Perhaps we can have some ideas or maybe they are nonsense. I.

D

Remember adding this to the list, because I was thinking that these maturity models, like the Apache project after the model, have metrics built into them to determine the maturity level. So there might be ideas for metrics within these. The judgments.

D

And I also think where you land, on a maturity model, make the metric this way.

E

Yeah I'm saying this because I've been it was years ago, really involved in these models, maturity and quality and so on, I'm, aware of some of them, so at least to have a link of them. Maybe I was looking for some of them, but they didn't. They didn't even exist. Yeah.

B

I mean I, see the Apache maturity model stuff here is that something that should be in GMD Shawn, yeah.

F

The Apache maturity model, I I, think it should should czar judgment I think it's something that naturally would fit in that category. I think if it's yeah I mean I think naturally would fit in that category. I think you could also make the argument that maturity might encompass things other than the growth maturity in decline, metrics and so I'd have to actually look at what the what the Apache model includes, which I have not done. Okay,.

B

Someone else from GM: do you want to just take an action item to have a look at that and see if it belongs in GMD I will.

F

I will do that right now. I will create a issue in GMT to look at the attach in maturity model. Okay, actually I'd. Actually previous just made a note to look at it myself, because it looks interesting as a title.

D

And so I'm sure Daniels question I think it would be helpful to have a list of maturity models because of caste is the place where people come to understand. Project health then directing them to existing efforts like maturity models is doable so.

F

I can just I just pulled it up and there are parts of the maturity model that fit in literally every working group there's a license and copyright model that would probably fit in risk. There's a community model that I think is likely to fall partly in diversity and inclusion, at least consensus-building models kind of a cultural metric. So there are the Apache maturity. Model is more than worth maturity and decline, but it does include growth, maturity and decline.

F

I would be happy to take this and have a gme group can to start work on the parts of it that are logically under growth, maturity, decline, mm-hmm but I think when it comes to and I think, that's probably you know like yeah license in copyright. It's definitely under risk.

D

Married this is a world where one day we'll be able to take these maturity models that that patronage here tomorrow, not from the to our metrics and then create answers with the person for.

B

That'll be cool, I would say that I think so. So this is a bit odd for me, cuz, like Apache maturity model. Is it's not a metric in and of itself, or is that a way to categorize metrics? It seems like an odd thing to have an a list of a list of metrics.

B

I also tend to think that we should probably discussions about things like like maturity models, and things like that are probably a little bit outside of the scope of this group and maybe something we should be doing kind of on the on the project as a whole, but I also I'll I'll, be honest, like with my practical practitioner hat on I'm, not sure that out of this list of things that we have here, that figuring out which models things fit in is maybe I wouldn't say its highest priority. No, no.

B

If people other people would agree, I mean.

F

The if there's some examples on the website and the Apache maturity model has a very narrative kind of report. That's probably pulled from qualitative analysis and lots of the kinds of metrics that the different working groups produced.

F

So to your question, done I think I think it does fall under the aegis of Kaos to think about it, but I don't think it falls clearly into a working group. Yeah.

E

F

E

Agree with you basically, my perception is that quality models are at the very end in a really specific context, so they are perhaps more interested in licensing risk or community sustainability. So, depending on where you are, you will focus on certain metrics, smaller.

A

E

Probably would be to focus on those metrics and then at some point. If someone is willing to build some quality model, perhaps you can. We can have some characterization of those metrics and say all of these set of metrics here are related to licenses and all of these.

A

E

Rated to community, so you can build whatever you want to these yeah. It was more I wanted to open these works with the with the goal of saying. Well, all of these exist if there is a stay or a really massive state of the art in quality models and so on in open-source and software engineering. The point is first: if we want to go into them, I think the answer is, we prefer not to enter them and then at least what we can do is to learn from them several metrics.

E

They were using at some point and say: well, they were using these metrics I'll.

A

Have a thought so I think one of the things that has come out on this as an action item for me is to curate this list a little bit so I mean it was I think the first thing was just to get that column to the right, and that doesn't look like much, but it's a little bit of time and I think so now.

A

Maybe the next thing would be to curate this list and kind of ask out loud whether things like maturity models are actually a metric right and then kind of cleaning up the repeats. That's on my to-do list. What if we considered maturity models at them in? My second point, is what if we considered maturity models at though the Tuesday weekly call, not necessarily within a particular at this point that makes sense.

B

That's where I think that belongs, rather than in this group, I mean I. Think it's fine for somebody to go off and and look at.

D

B

Of the state of the art and some of the stuff I just I, see, is kind of out of scope and.

A

We could consider that at the kind of the project it at the whole.

B

Yeah the other piece that I see as I as I look down through this as kind of a theme is licensing so there there are a whole bunch of metrics related to licensing and there a few others scattered throughout the the document that don't seem to be clearly owned by a.

B

By a work group, and so if somebody, if somebody loves licensing and wanted to dig in that's, that's one thing that I I see as a possible possible gap.

B

A

Clear I think that would clearly go over to the risk.

A

F

B

Okay, so do you wanna take the AR who wants stick the AR, so our action item AR was an Intel thing, X required who wants to take an action item to take a look at the the licensing bets and and figure out how to get those into the appropriate risk working group and was still a subset of GMD. No.

A

It's at own working group, okay,.

B

A

Getting off the ground, okay, so I mean I, guess the answer is the risk working group will take that on as an action item. Okay,.

B

And who's on the risk well,.

A

Kate Cates there and Shawn's there and I'm cool.

A

B

What I'm here to talk to, if I, have questions about it, yeah.

F

Katyn Manor, okay,.

B

So we we should probably get that is that, on the participate page I haven't seen that no.

A

Just been a lot about finding time, yeah.

B

A

Meet I mean it it's really just starting Lee, okay,.

B

F

The you know we're trying to engage the Japan, and you mentioned when whatever calls, how difficult that can be on phone calls, and so we have some other folks that were engaging right now as well and I. Think I think it's going to get some traction after the Leadership Summit cool.

B

Another one that I saw that is kind of a kind of a theme is like response so often times like.

A

Response to issues or response to pull requests, yeah.

B

Average issue resolution time average time to respond to a code, merge request, average time to first response to an issue average time of open issues. I think they're I think that might might naturally lend itself to kind of a focus area that I think would be pretty important.

D

That's good. You also depend on the nature of the question too, because I could see that bowing into GMD and I can also see that falling into diversity and inclusion, because those are three things that might come up in a D&I question. Yeah.

B

I mean I think that those are these in particular sort of what I would consider serve prototypical examples of things that belong in this working group, because I think that you could take these metrics and interpret them in different ways for D&I a risk for GMD.

B

So I think there are ones that are probably common across most of the working groups, but I don't see any links to anything. So I don't see anybody. It's been kind of kind of working on that, then I think the first step would be to you know, identify which of these metrics is like bug, age, I, don't know. If that's the same as like resolution time, I, don't know how we would how he would decide that, but that's another one I see as a possible thing for something too.

B

Someone might want to work on.

F

Ya bug age seems like one that would fit in with maturity decline.

F

E

You what they can do here is we do have some of these metrics already defined somewhere, so I can I can try to look for those definitions and try to produce some small paragraph for each of them. That leaves we have all of the time to X. Okay,.

B

Why don't you create? Let's give you the action item to create an issue for it with a link to a Google Doc, where you can start developing that and then we can and then we can start collaborating on it. Okay,.

E

B

Does that work that's kind of what we did with the other one.

E

B

E

Me the the process we are all following, so this is the process right, I, open a ticket and then I reference, a Google, Doc yeah.

B

A

So is this about? Is this about giving details to the metric versus about adding a new metric.

E

A

E

Oh right, oh no.

B

Go ahead maybe.

E

I was throughout both basically okay.

A

Cuz I think I think if I'm I'll put something in URI if you're adding detail to an existing metric, mm-hmm I, just I put one here, I mean this is just the four closed issues, but there's a template that we use to provide detail. Mm-Hmm.

B

Yeah, where Sean's gonna put together a template for that, but I think the first step is figuring out which which metrics fit in those or do they mean, and then we can use the template to put put in the details. Okay,.

A

No problem yeah.

B

But I think the the first step is to at least to even figure out which of the metrics in this big list here fall into that kind of response time, because there are like oh here's, another one, percentile distribution, the first response time. So there are a bunch of them in here that relate to that that we need to at least figure out what the scope of it is and for the that Daniels already has some definition on. We can start with that and then fit that into the template later.

D

Before you run out of time, I wanted to pose the question. What we can offer we couldn't make this meeting to participate. Is there something you want to discuss on the mailing list? Is there action items we would like people to pick up wishes to address I.

B

Would say I mean if there are any metrics in this list that haven't been haven't been defined, that somebody wants to pick up or if they want to collaborate with us on some of the organizational diversity stuff or once Daniel gets the pull request and or not the pull request issue and the the dock. People can start collaborating on that as well. I.

B

Mean at this point we're just sort of getting organized, so it's there aren't any things that are like super tangible, like someone could go off and do this I think we'll have those soon. So once we once we get a little bit organized around the organizational diversity, I think we can start sort of farming. Those out like we have with the DNI working group and sort of just give those to people to start defining. Once we have the template and everything.

B

Okay, I have another meeting in one minute, so I I definitely need to drop well.

F

We are at the end of time exactly.

B

I must stop.

F

B

Thanks it ready right.