Claire, I was just trying to encourage more people to sign off by showing them that they would end up in the stats reports. Hence the do some sign offs, become famous. I thought that is what you were wanting. Chris Claire Hernandez <claire.hernandez@biblibre.com> wrote: On 05/07/2012 20:46, Chris Cormack wrote:
To that end, I have been creating the statistics of signoffs
http://blog.bigballofwax.co.nz/2012/04/01/bug-statistics-for-march-2012/ http://blog.bigballofwax.co.nz/2012/05/04/statistics-for-koha-april-2012/ http://blog.bigballofwax.co.nz/2012/06/01/bugenh-statistics-for-may-2012/ http://blog.bigballofwax.co.nz/2012/07/01/bugzilla-statistics-for-june-2012/
So people can recognise the hard work of the people doing sign offs
Do some sign offs, become famous!! Save some kittens! Hello Chris,
I am not sure to understand why you answer me that. I wasn't saying that nothing is done. What I am saying is a measure of our (BibLibre) investment (people, time and energy) versus the result (and metrics I have put to follow it). We are able to challenge our (BibLibre) practices if you (community) have feedback to give us. Secondly, signoffs statistics does not say everything : as Marcel show this morning, a patch can be signed-off multiple times before being integrated (and my main metric is "done" as "patch pushed"). Furthermore, the main patches attached are not bugfixes but enhancements which needs acceptance tests and non regression validation. If you sort bugs that "need signoff" by change date, that's clear that almost of patches waiting are enhancements. The most important thing for me is the value added we deliver to users at the end... Thanks, Claire.