Bugzilla Data Mining (2)

OK, I figured out how to do this automatically.

So, since the beginning of time, there have been 9567 bugs in the Browser, MailNews, Firefox and Thunderbird products which started as UNCONFIRMED, got confirmed before they got resolved[0], and ended up FIXED. This is a table of how long each of them took to get confirmed:

Elapsed Time # Confirmed % Confirmed # open UNCO older than this
1 hour 1378 13.9 12022
1 day 5299 55.4 11961
1 week 7171 75.0 11462
1 month 8488 88.7 10450
2 months 9053 94.6 9400
3 months 9253 96.7 8201
6 months 9436 98.6 6170
1 year 9522 99.5 3585
2 years 9561 99.9 409

So the larger data set bears out the results from the smaller one. After 3 months, we’ve squeezed 96.7% of the juice out of the UNCO pile. (And, these figures don’t take into account the case when someone finds a long-dead bug which doesn’t occur any more and marks it FIXED instead of WORKSFORME.) Yet, we have 8200 UNCO bugs open which are older than that.


[0] This is a technical limitation. There were 11912 overall; i.e. 2345 went straight from UNCO to FIXED. I don’t think leaving them out of the table skews the data, but I’ll listen to arguments that say it does.

2 thoughts on “Bugzilla Data Mining (2)

  1. So you’re suggesting someone should take care of those old unconfirmed bugs and see if they’re still valid? :p

  2. posting the comment I emailed when comments seemed to be disabled…

    >After 3 months, we’ve squeezed 96.7% of the juice out of the UNCO pile.

    I don’t think that’s right. You’re not looking at the quantity of “juice” that was in the UNCOs, you’re looking at is the quantity of juice that has been extracted and where it came from. To continue the fruit analogy, you’ve getting a delivery of new fruit every day, and you’re squeezing some of it – the rest of the unsqueezed fruit is piling up (and then rotting), and then you’re concluding that you’re not getting any juice out of it. That’s not necessarily because the fruit had no juice, it might just be because you haven’t tried to squeeze it.

    Having said that, I don’t think that necessarily means the old UNCOs are any good. If you can’t keep up with squeezing all the fruit and you’ve
    got a ready supply of fresh fruit, then you may as well use the fresh fruit and chuck out the rotten stuff.

    Sorry… seem to have gone a bit far with the fruit analogy, but I think the points are still fair :)

    > 2345 went straight from UNCO to FIXED. I don’t think leaving them out of the table skews the data, but I’ll listen to arguments that say it does.

    My stats knowledge is a bit rusty, but I think it’s impossible to know if leaving them out skews the data or not. To get stats that you know aren’t skewed, you have to have a representative sample including the different types..