Hi, On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 03:21:07PM +0100, Francesca Ciceri wrote: > Hi there, > I wanted to ask your opinion about the RC-stats paragraph on DPN: > historically we relied on Alexander weekly blog post on the number of RC > bugs and related stats. When he stopped to publish it, we decided to use > directly the udd queries to give our readers those numbers. Now, > fortunately, Richard Hartmann started to send a weekly blogpost similar > to Alexander's one, so we decided to switch back to it. > As you probably know, DPN is frozen on Friday night and published on Monday > morning. This means that sometimes the number of RC-bugs on the paragraph > are not precise. So, here the question: do we prefer to have a link to > a blogpost (Richard's one) providing a detailed analysis of the numbers > (which are slightly inaccurate at the moment of DPN publication) or we > prefer to use directly udd queries (ie: means more accurate numbers, as > we can add them last minute, but not detailed analysis of them)? > We could also ask Richard to publish his blogpost on Monday morning- > What do you think about it? I think that we should rely on Richard's blog post, which provides detailed statistics. I believe there is more value in the detailed statistics, for data a few days old, than in the two numbers we collect from udd, which anyway risk to differ from the value the readers could get from the same query, because of the volatility of the number of bugs. We could mention explicitly that the numbers from Richard's post give the status for (the end of) a particular week, a point the readers to the UDD link if they want current values. Cédric
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature