Our community elections process is very closely tied to the Insights leaderboard data available in V1. In fact the initial reason the V1 leaderboard was originally created was specifically to address our usecase. Critical to this is the ability to bulk export data for all contributors of a given project as measured over a particular time frame, irrespective of what type of contribution may have been made. (commits, issues, wiki, whatever)
It’s come to our attention that the Insights V2 data leaderboard data seems to be a subset of the data currently available in V1and there are no provisions to do a bulk export as far as we can tell.
Looking for guidance here.
Thanks!
-kenny
1 Like
Hi @Kenny_Paul thanks for making us aware of this. @Chaitan as we’re making updates to insights, can we keep order by global contributions in mind?
@Chaitan in v2 we can order by contribution type, but we don’t have a global contribution leaderboard for contributing organizations.
For example: Insights
@Kenny_Paul would this leaderboard be sufficient if we could export this data, and have a order by all?
Hi @Henry_Quaye,
The short answer is, “Nope.” 
As it stands most, if not all, of the Projects in the LFN umbrella would be blocked from conducting a community election if Insights V1 were to be fully deprecated and we were reliant only upon Insights V2.
The graphical slice and dice features of the V2 leaderboard and/or Community Management are fabo, but quite insufficient. The leaderboard requirements that have been deprecated in V2 are no different than what currently exists for V1. There are a couple of minor exceptions to V1 features that are marked as “should” below, that if necessary could be handled by using an exported file rather than it being available in the web interface.
- In addition to the pre-set ranges provided in the pick-list, user must also be able to to select a specifically defined date range.
Example: From June 6, 2022 to March 26, 2023
- Results must include anyone with one contribution or greater in any category for the time period selected
- Results must include all contributors, both affiliated and unaffiliated matching the criteria
- Results must include the following columns. Where multiple source systems have been used by the Project, each source system should be broken down separately into its own column:
Contributor Name
Organization
Code in aggregate: Commits
Code in aggregate: LOC Added
Code in aggregate: LOC Modified
Code in aggregate: LOC Deleted
SCM System(s): PRs Created
SCM System(s): PRs Open
SCM System(s): PRs Closed
SCM System(s): PRs Merged
SCM System(s): PRs Reviewed
SCM System(s): PRs Approved
SCM System(s): PRs Review Comments
SCM System(s): Active Changesets
SCM System(s): Merged Changesets
Issue System(s): Comments
Issue System(s): Issues Assigned To contributor
Issue System(s): Issues Created
Issue System(s): Issues Closed
Issue System(s): Issues Average Days in Open for Assigned To
Document System(s): Comments
Document System(s): Posts
Document System(s): Pages Created
Document System(s): Pages Edited
Document System(s): Attachments
- For members of Linux Foundation staff only, the results must also include the contributor’s primary email address
- Results should be viewable in a tabular form via the browser
- Results should be sortable by column
- Results should be searchable by contributor
- And of course, must have the ability to export the results in a csv format
Hope that was detailed enough. 
1 Like
Hi @Kenny_Paul , thank you for the details.
We don’t expect to fully deprecate V1 without having appropriate parity in V3.
Based on the feedback, we have brought back the custom time frame in V3 which is under development at this moment. I shall schedule a call with you to keep you informed on the progress we have made so far. We will discuss the requirement to export data on that call as well.
Thank you for your feedback. We will improve with earnestness.
1 Like
