Enhancing Developer Metrics: The Call for Clearer PR Status on GitHub

The Quest for Granular Developer Metrics: Merged vs. Closed PRs

In the realm of software development, clear and accurate data is paramount for understanding team performance and project velocity. A recent discussion on GitHub's community forum, initiated by user Neustradamus, brings to light a subtle yet significant ambiguity in how Pull Request (PR) statuses are displayed, directly impacting how teams track developer metrics and overall productivity.

The Current State: A Blurry Line

Neustradamus's core observation is simple: GitHub currently conflates 'closed' and 'merged' Pull Requests under a single 'Closed' filter. While a merged PR signifies successful integration of code, a truly closed PR might indicate an abandoned feature, a superseded solution, or a rejected change. For teams relying on performance metrics software or manual tracking, this lack of distinction can skew perceptions of throughput and code delivery.

The current GitHub interface offers two primary filters for PRs:

• Open:

  https://github.com/desktop/desktop/pulls?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr

• Closed:

  https://github.com/desktop/desktop/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aclosed

As Neustradamus points out, the 'Closed' category currently encompasses both genuinely closed and merged PRs, making it challenging to get an accurate read on development activity.

The Proposed Solution: Clarity for Better Insights

To rectify this, the suggestion is to introduce a third, distinct filter: 'Merged'. This would provide a clearer breakdown:

• Open: For active, ongoing Pull Requests.
• Closed: For PRs that were explicitly closed without being merged.
• Merged: For PRs whose changes have been successfully integrated into the codebase.

This separation would significantly enhance the ability of development teams to analyze their developer metrics. Imagine trying to assess the success rate of PRs or the amount of completed work – without this distinction, merged and abandoned efforts appear identical in the 'Closed' count, leading to misinterpretations of performance monitoring metrics.

Why This Matters for Developer Productivity

For organizations striving for high developer productivity, granular data is key. Understanding the ratio of merged PRs to truly closed PRs can offer insights into code review effectiveness, project planning, and even developer engagement. A high number of closed-but-not-merged PRs might signal issues in the development process, while a high merge rate indicates efficient delivery.

The current ambiguity forces teams to resort to more complex queries or external tooling to derive these insights, adding friction to the workflow and potentially hindering the adoption of robust performance metrics software.

GitHub's Response and the Path Forward

GitHub's automated response acknowledged the feedback, assuring the community that the input would be reviewed by product teams. While individual responses aren't guaranteed, such discussions are crucial for shaping future platform improvements. The response also directed users to the Changelog and Product Roadmap for updates, encouraging further engagement and detail from the community.

This community insight underscores the continuous need for development tools to evolve in tandem with the growing sophistication of developer metrics and performance monitoring metrics. Clearer UI distinctions can lead to more actionable insights, ultimately fostering a more efficient and productive development environment for everyone.