Metrics Worth Tracking for OSPOs

[germonprez]

- Active contributors (and with that …)

• What activities count as contribution (right now we’re just counting code contribution; I know FINOS uses a much wider definition that includes stuff like attendance at working groups, raising GitHub issues, and writing docs)
• Our current definition: have pushed/proposed at least on pull request (which of course could contain n many individual commits) of code in the trailing 6 months
• It looks like epam/OSCI is using the definition of >= 10 commits per a given time period

- Active projects – i.e., projects to which the org is actively contributing

- Total # of PRs made by org (per period)

- Number of FTEs in OSPO

- Contributed projects – number of projects the org has contributed as open source

- Break down of projects self-hosted vs those contributed to other entities/foundations

- Approved contributors (if the org explicitly approves contributors)

- Approved projects for contribution (if the org explicitly approves projects for contribution)

- # of Foundations in which the org is a member

- # of CCLAs the bank has executed/entered

- # of open source projects consumed at the organization

[vinodkahuja]

@germonprez that for sharing these questions. These are interesting questions and worth digging into from OSPO's perspective. I will keep them on the agenda for the upcoming OSPO wg meeting

[anajsana]

Thanks @germonprez ! I've seen these OSPO metrics are already documented in the OSPO metrics WG (cc @Ruth-ikegah . These were the metrics I was telling during the OSPOlogy Working Days 🙂 )

[anajsana]

@germonprez that for sharing these questions. These are interesting questions and worth digging into from OSPO's perspective. I will keep them on the agenda for the upcoming OSPO wg meeting

@vinodkahuja To give you some context, these metrics are being used by OSPOs, mainly from the finance/banking sector. As a starting point, maybe we could better define a "path" for each of them (goal-question-metric approach) and document how to generate them via the existing CHAOSS tooling. What do you think?

[vinodkahuja]

@anajsana sure! at CHAOSS we have always taken goal-question-metric approach to define metrics. To work on those we need more representation from OSPO folks to better understand their view to be able to define them.