9 ms·
Very interesting stuff! Kudos for taking the time to put this together. I have 2 suggestions for the presentation: 1. "Cumulative commits" looks like it start
by azakai 12y ago
Very interesting stuff! Kudos for taking the time to put this together.
I have 2 suggestions for the presentation:
1. "Cumulative commits" looks like it starts from 0 in 2013, and that total commits doubled in the two projects over a few months. This is potentially misleading - I assume this is showing additional commits since 2013, i.e., 2013 is the baseline. Might be worth mentioning that explicitly.
2. "The players" graph has a nonlinear, seemingly arbitrary scale. This is potentially misleading as it looks like e.g. Samsung has 1/3 the commits of Google, when actually it is more like 1/10. Might be worth mentioning the scale is not linear, or just using a linear scale?
- progers7 12y agoExcellent points, thank you. The players graph is tough. There are many 0 entries which means a true log scale is out. A linear graph ends up being dominated by Apple and Google so you can't really see the other organizations. I should call out the scale more explicitly though. Btw, the scale is technically a sqrt scale: https://github.com/mbostock/d3/wiki/Quantitative-Scales#sqrt https://github.com/mbostock/d3/wiki/Quantitative-Scales#sqrt
- stormbrew 12y agoIf Apple and Google dominate, the graph really should show that. Can I propose breaking it down into two graphs: One with Google, Apple and other; and the other graph breaking down the others? It's a hard problem, but I really think non-linear scales obfuscate more than they clarify for stuff like this. Non-linear scales should be used to eliminate variables not relevant to the analysis. That Google is 10* Samsung is part of, and not extrenuous to, the analysis here.