JP7228940B1 - Program, Information Processing Apparatus, Method, and Information Processing System - Google Patents

Abstract

An object of the present invention is to appropriately evaluate the development performance of a team.
A program according to one aspect of the present disclosure is a means for acquiring information about development activities by members belonging to a team, which is stored in an issue management service by a member belonging to a team using the issue management service, It functions as means for generating multiple indicators based on information on development activities, means for evaluating development performance by the team based on the multiple indicators, and means for outputting evaluation results of development performance by the team.
[Selection drawing] Fig. 4

Description

The present disclosure relates to programs, information processing apparatuses, methods, and information processing systems.

Product (eg, software) development in an organization is typically accomplished by a team of engineers. The product development manager is required to properly understand the development performance of the team in charge of the product.

Patent Literature 1 discloses a technique for evaluating the results of software developers.

Japanese Patent Application Laid-Open No. 2015-118650

However, the technique described in Patent Literature 1 is intended to evaluate the achievements of individual developers, and cannot be immediately applied to the evaluation of development performance by a team.

An object of the present disclosure is to provide technology for appropriately evaluating development performance by a team.

A program according to one aspect of the present disclosure comprises a computer, a means for acquiring information on development activities by members belonging to a team, which is stored in an issue management service when members belonging to a team use the issue management service, and information on development activities. and serve as a means of evaluating development performance by a team based on multiple metrics.

According to the present disclosure, development performance by a team can be appropriately evaluated.

1 is a block diagram showing the configuration of an information processing system according to an embodiment; FIG. It is a block diagram showing the configuration of the client device of the present embodiment. It is a block diagram which shows the structure of the server of this embodiment. 1 is an explanatory diagram of one aspect of the present embodiment; FIG. 3 is a diagram showing the data structure of a repository database of this embodiment; FIG. It is a figure which shows the data structure of the development activity database of this embodiment. 4 is a flowchart of information processing according to the embodiment; It is a figure which shows the example of a screen displayed in the information processing of this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of a screen displayed in the information processing of this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of a screen displayed in the information processing of this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of a screen displayed in the information processing of this embodiment.

An embodiment of the present invention will be described in detail below with reference to the drawings. In the drawings for describing the embodiments, in principle, the same constituent elements are denoted by the same reference numerals, and repeated description thereof will be omitted.

As used herein, a team means a group of engineers. A team is responsible for developing a specific product. A product is typically software, and may be, for example, a website for providing a web service such as SaaS (Software as a Service), or an application installed on a computer. Within the team, each engineer will proceed with development by dividing roles for each function, output, etc. In addition, the engineers in the team are not limited to employees employed by a specific company (organization), but may be employees of any company in a development project jointly developed by multiple companies. Furthermore, the engineers in the team may include temporary employees and engineers of sole proprietors (so-called freelancers).

(1) Configuration of information processing system The configuration of the information processing system will be described. FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing the configuration of the information processing system of this embodiment.

As shown in FIG. 1 , the information processing system 1 includes a client device 10 and a server 30 .
The client device 10 and server 30 are connected via a network (for example, the Internet or an intranet) NW. The server 30 is also connected to the external system 50 via the network NW.

The client device 10 is an example of an information processing device that transmits requests to the server 30 . The client device 10 is, for example, a smart phone, a tablet terminal, or a personal computer. The client device 10 can be used to check the development performance evaluation results provided by the information processing system 1 by the team. Users of client device 10 may include, for example, at least one of the following:
・Member or leader of the team to be evaluated (hereinafter referred to as “target team”) ・The person in charge of product development in charge of the target team ・Person in charge of human resources in the organization to which the target team belongs ・In the organization to which the target team belongs Management executives/Persons who browse the job information of the organization to which the target team belongs

The server 30 is an example of an information processing device that provides the client device 10 with a response in response to a request transmitted from the client device 10 . Server 30 is, for example, a server computer. The server 30 provides evaluation results of development performance by the target team in response to a request from the client device 10 .

The external system 50 provides information on development activities by members (engineers) of the target team in response to requests from the server 30 . External system 50 is typically a software development platform, such as GitHub®. GitHub manages source code, which is a product of development by engineers, and manages reviews of the source code.

Note that the external system 50 is not limited to GitHub, and may be another software development platform such as GitLab (registered trademark) or Bitbucket (registered trademark). Alternatively, the external system 50 may be an issue management tool (for example, Jira (registered trademark)) in software development, or a task management tool (for example, Trello (registered trademark) or backlog (registered trademark), etc.). These software development platforms, issue management tools, or task management tools can also be collectively referred to as issue management services. The following description assumes that GitHub is used as the external system 50 .

GitHub is a source code hosting service. GitHub has a repository (management means) for version management of source code, which is a product of development. GitHub maintains a list of source code at a given point in time. GitHub has various functions such as issue (creation), push, commit, pull request, and merge. Issue is a function for managing project and source code issues. Push is a function of uploading the source code created or modified in the engineer's local environment (local repository) to the remote environment (remote repository). Commit is a function for registering changes to the source code. A pull request is a function to notify that a push has been made and to request a review. Merge is a function of finalizing review results and integrating histories. Here, the source code is a code (character string) written in a programming language such as Python or a markup language such as HTML or CSS, as well as a type of programming language such as JavaScript (registered trademark). It is a concept that includes a script (character string) written in a certain script language.

A programming language is a language used for software development, and specifically includes JavaScript (registered trademark), Java (registered trademark), Scala, PHP, Ruby, Python, Go, C#, and the like. A software framework is a software platform used for software development. Specifically, jQuery, React, Vue.js, Angular, Nuxt.js, Next.js, ReactNative, Spring Framework, Play Framework, Laravel, CakePHP, RubyonRails, Django, Flask, TensorFlow, gin, Unity, Express, etc.

(1-1) Configuration of Client Apparatus The configuration of the client apparatus will be described. FIG. 2 is a block diagram showing the configuration of the client device of this embodiment.

As shown in FIG. 2, the client device 10 includes a storage device 11, a processor 12, an input/output interface 13, and a communication interface . The client device 10 is connected to the display 21 .

Storage device 11 is configured to store programs and data. The storage device 11 is, for example, a combination of ROM (Read Only Memory), RAM (Random Access Memory), and storage (eg, flash memory or hard disk).

Programs include, for example, the following programs.
・OS (Operating System) program ・Application (for example, web browser) program that executes information processing

The data includes, for example, the following data.
・Databases referenced in information processing ・Data obtained by executing information processing (that is, execution results of information processing)

The processor 12 is a computer that implements the functions of the client device 10 by activating programs stored in the storage device 11 . Processor 12 is, for example, at least one of the following:
・CPU (Central Processing Unit)
・GPU (Graphic Processing Unit)
・ASIC (Application Specific Integrated Circuit)
・FPGA (Field Programmable Array)

The input/output interface 13 acquires information (for example, user instructions) from an input device connected to the client device 10 and outputs information (for example, an image signal) to an output device connected to the client device 10. Configured.
Input devices are, for example, keyboards, pointing devices, touch panels, or combinations thereof.
Output devices are, for example, the display 21, speakers, or a combination thereof.

Communication interface 14 is configured to control communications between client device 10 and an external device (eg, server 30).

The display 21 is configured to display images (still images or moving images). The display 21 is, for example, a liquid crystal display or an organic EL display.

(1-2) Server Configuration The server configuration will be described. FIG. 3 is a block diagram showing the configuration of the server of this embodiment.

As shown in FIG. 3, the server 30 includes a storage device 31, a processor 32, an input/output interface 33, and a communication interface .

Storage device 31 is configured to store programs and data. Storage device 31 is, for example, a combination of ROM, RAM, and storage (eg, flash memory or hard disk).

Programs include, for example, the following programs.
・OS program ・Application program that executes information processing

The data includes, for example, the following data.
・Databases referenced in information processing ・Execution results of information processing

The processor 32 is a computer that implements the functions of the server 30 by activating programs stored in the storage device 31 . Processor 32 is, for example, at least one of the following:
・CPU
・GPU
・ASICs
・FPGA

The input/output interface 33 is configured to acquire user instructions from input devices connected to the server 30 and to output information to output devices connected to the server 30 .
Input devices are, for example, keyboards, pointing devices, touch panels, or combinations thereof.
An output device is, for example, a display.

Communication interface 34 is configured to control communications between server 30 and an external device (eg, client device 10 or external system 50).

(2) One aspect of the embodiment One aspect of the present embodiment will be described. FIG. 4 is an explanatory diagram of one aspect of the present embodiment.

As shown in FIG. 4, members belonging to team ET1 use an external system 50 to carry out various development activities. The external system 50 stores information on such development activity logs (hereinafter referred to as "development activity information"). The server 30 collects development activity information from the external system 50 . The server 30 may collect development activity information periodically, or may collect development activity information in response to some trigger (for example, receiving an evaluation request from the client device 10).

The client device 10 requests the server 30 to evaluate the development performance by the team ET1 in accordance with the instruction from the user US2. The server 30 generates a plurality of indicators regarding development performance by team ET1 in response to the evaluation request. Specifically, the server 30 generates each index based on the development activity information of the members of the team ET1 (for example, by integrating the development activity information of a plurality of members). The server 30 evaluates the development performance of the team ET1 based on the generated multiple indicators, and transmits an evaluation response including the evaluation result to the client device 10. FIG. The client device 10 presents the evaluation response to the user US2.

Thus, according to the server 30, it is possible to appropriately evaluate the development performance of the team ET1 based on the multifaceted analysis of the development activity information of the members of the team ET1 through a plurality of indicators.

(3) Database The database of this embodiment will be described. The following databases are stored in the storage device 31.

(3-1) Repository Database The repository database of this embodiment will be described. FIG. 5 is a diagram showing the data structure of the repository database of this embodiment.

The repository database stores repository information. The repository information is information about repositories created in the external system 50 .

As shown in FIG. 5, the repository database includes a "repository ID" field, a "team ID" field, and an "address" field. Each field is associated with each other.

A repository ID is stored in the "repository ID" field. A repository ID is information for identifying a repository. The server 30 can acquire the repository ID from the external system 50 .

A team ID is stored in the "team ID" field. A team ID is information identifying a team that created a repository identified by the corresponding repository ID. The server 30 can acquire team IDs from the external system 50 .

Note that the team ID may be associated with the organization ID in a database (not shown). The organization ID associated with the team ID identifies the organization to which the team corresponding to the team ID belongs. Also, the team ID may be associated with the engineer ID in a database (not shown). An engineer ID associated with a team ID identifies members belonging to the team corresponding to the team ID.

The "address" field stores address information. The address information is information (for example, URL (Uniform Resource Locator)) for accessing the repository identified by the corresponding repository ID.

(3-2) Development Activity Database The development activity database of this embodiment will be described. FIG. 6 is a diagram showing the data structure of the development activity database of this embodiment.

The development activity database stores development activity information. The development activity information is information on activities performed by the engineer regarding the source code created in the external system 50 and stored in the repository.

For example, when a user (that is, an engineer) pushes the source code from the local repository, the external system 50 records information that can identify the user who pushed and the date and time of the push as log information. Similarly, when an issue is created with respect to the source code, when there is a pull request with respect to the source code, when a comment is created, when a reply to the comment is created, or when a merge is made, the external system 50 records log information.

The server 30 updates the development activity database based on the development activity information acquired from the external system 50 . The server 30 may acquire the development activity information periodically, or may acquire the development activity information in response to some trigger (for example, reception of an evaluation request from the client device 10).

As shown in FIG. 6, the development activity database includes an "activity ID" field, a "repository ID" field, an "action ID" field, an "engineer ID" field, a "date and time" field, and a "source code" field. field.

The "activity ID" field stores an activity ID. The activity ID is information that identifies the activity performed by the engineer regarding the source code created in the external system 50 and stored in the repository.

A repository ID is stored in the "repository ID" field. A repository ID is information identifying a repository in which a source code in which an activity specified by a corresponding activity ID is performed is stored.

Action information is stored in the "action" field. Action information is information about the type of activity specified by the corresponding activity ID.

An engineer ID is stored in the "engineer ID" field. An engineer ID is information that identifies an engineer (that is, a user of the external system 50) who performed an activity specified by the corresponding activity ID.

The "date and time" field stores date and time information. The date and time information is information related to the date and time when the activity specified by the corresponding activity ID was performed.

The "source code" field stores source code information. Source code information is information (eg, filename information) about the source code in which the activity identified by the corresponding activity ID was performed.

(4) Information processing Information processing according to the present embodiment will be described. FIG. 7 is a flow chart of information processing in this embodiment. FIG. 8 is a diagram showing an example of a screen displayed during information processing according to this embodiment. FIG. 9 is a diagram showing an example of a screen displayed during information processing according to this embodiment. FIG. 10 is a diagram showing an example of a screen displayed during information processing according to this embodiment. FIG. 11 is a diagram showing an example of a screen displayed during information processing according to this embodiment.

As shown in FIG. 7, the client device 10 executes an evaluation request (S110).
Specifically, the client device 10 generates an evaluation request according to a user's instruction. The evaluation request includes information (for example, team ID) that can identify the target team. In addition, the evaluation request may include information that can specify a period to be evaluated (hereinafter referred to as “target period”). However, if the target period is predetermined, the evaluation request may not include such information. The following description assumes that the user can specify the target period.

At the same time as the evaluation request (S110) or before or after the evaluation request (S110), the server 30 may perform user authentication.
Specifically, the client device 10 acquires information used for user authentication and transmits it to the server 30 . Based on this information, the server 30 confirms whether the operator of the client device 10 is a registered user. The server 30 executes subsequent processing when the user authentication is successful. However, if the user is authenticated at the same time as or after the evaluation request (S110) or after the evaluation request (S110) and the user is not assigned the authority to view the evaluation results of the target team, the server 30 does not send the evaluation request. refuse.

Information used for user authentication includes information that can identify a user (for example, a user ID) and information provided by the operator of the client device 10 to prove that the operator is the user himself (for example, passwords, or biometrics, etc.).

After step S110, the server 30 performs information acquisition (S130).
Specifically, the server 30 receives the evaluation request transmitted in step S110. The server 30 identifies the target team and target period based on the received evaluation request. The server 30, for example, refers to the repository database (FIG. 5) and extracts the repository ID associated with the team ID indicating the target team. The server 30 references the development activity database (FIG. 6), for example, and extracts development activity information including date information indicating dates within the identified target period and the extracted repository ID.

Note that the server 30 may acquire development activity information about members belonging to the target team from the external system 50 and update the database before extracting the development activity information from the development activity database.

After step S130, the server 30 generates an index (S131).
Specifically, the server 30 generates a plurality of indicators regarding the development performance of the target team during the target period based on the development activity information acquired in step S130. The server 30 may treat the acquired development activity information as it is as an index, or may calculate an index by performing an operation (for example, counting) based on the development activity information.

Multiple indicators can include, for example, at least one of the following:
・Development volume index ・Development efficiency index ・Development quality index

Indicators regarding the volume of development can include, for example, at least one of the following:
・Number of pull requests created ・Number of merged pull requests ・Number of reviews ・Number of reviewed pull requests ・Number of coding (active days)
・The number of commits ・The number of merges to the main branch In each of the indicators related to the volume of development shown above, the larger the value, the larger the volume of development. However, as will be described later, these indicators tend to increase as the size of the team (for example, the number of members) increases, so it is preferable to make corrections according to the size of the team in order to make a reasonable evaluation. Correction of the metric may be performed in the generation of the metric (S131) or may be performed in the performance evaluation (S132).

Indicators of development efficiency can include, for example, at least one of the following: Note that the smaller the value of any of the following indicators related to development efficiency, the higher the efficiency of development.
・Average time [h] until members of own team do the first review
・Average time [h] from pull request creation to merge or close
・Average time from first commit to pull request creation [h]
・Average time from pull request creation to review [h]
・Average time from first review to close [h]
・Average time from the first review to the last approval [h]
・Average time from last approval to merge [h]
・Average time from creating a merged pull request to the main branch to merging [h]
・Average time [h] from the first commit associated with a pull request merged to the main branch to the merge

Indicators of development quality can include, for example, at least one of the following: Of the indices related to the quality of development shown below, the smaller the value for both the "proportion of unreviewed merges" and the "proportion of change failures," the higher the quality of development. On the other hand, among the indicators for development quality shown below, "average number of comments per pull request", "average number of changed lines per pull request" and "number of changed files per pull request" are evaluated only by simple size. may not be appropriate. For example, a qualitative analysis may be performed on these indicators, and the smaller the difference from the appropriate value, the higher the quality of development may be treated.
・Percentage of pull requests merged without review [%]
- Modification failure rate - Average number of comments for one pull request - Average number of modified lines per pull request - Number of modified files per pull request Here, the modification failure rate means the ratio of failures that occur due to changes. As an example, the change defect rate can be expressed as the ratio of the number of pull requests merged into the main branch from the branch tagged as defect to the number of pull requests merged into the main branch. A branch tagged as fault is, for example, a branch (regardless of case) containing a string denoting a fix (hotfix) or a string denoting reverting a change (revert).

Note that the server 30 may store the generated index in a database (not shown). As a result, when the same target team and the same target period are specified, the server 30 can read out and use the indices stored in the database instead of generating the indices (S131). . In addition, regardless of the length of the target period, the server 30 generates an index in a predetermined time unit (for example, day unit) belonging to the target period, stores it in the database, and generates an index over the time unit belonging to the target period. may be used to generate an indicator for the period of interest. As a result, even when a target period that overlaps with a target period specified in the past is specified, the indicator generated in the past can be reused to generate the indicator (S131).

After step S131, the server 30 performs performance evaluation (S132).
Specifically, the server 30 evaluates at least one of the following based on the index generated in step S131.
・Evaluation of individual indicators of the target team during the target period ・Evaluation of the development volume of the target team during the target period ・Evaluation of the development efficiency of the target team during the target period ・Evaluation of the development quality of the target team during the target period ・Target team during the target period Comprehensive evaluation of the development performance of

The server 30 can perform pre-processing on the individual indicators before performing the evaluation. As an example of preprocessing for individual indices, the server 30 can process the indices generated in step S131. Processing can include, for example, at least one of the following.
・Scale conversion (e.g. normalization)
・Correction (e.g. correction to mitigate the impact of team size)
Rounding (e.g. conversion to a coarser rating)
・Reversal or sign reversal (for example, processing to convert an index that is estimated to decrease as performance increases to an index that increases as performance increases)

As an example of evaluation of the individual index, the server 30 can perform individual evaluation of the index by comparing the index generated in step S131 or its processed value with a reference value. A reference value may be determined, for example, based on at least one of the following.
・The value of the same index of the target team during the period other than the target period, or its statistical value ・The value of the same index of the other team during the target period or other period, or its statistical value ・The same category of the target team during the target period Values of other indicators, or their statistical values ・A value obtained by correcting one of the examples of standard values described here based on the number of members included in the target team ”, “development efficiency”, or “development quality”. As an example, the number of pull requests created and the number of merged pull requests are indicators of the same category, ie, "development volume."
Also, the number of members included in the target team can be derived, for example, by calculating the number of engineers linked to the repository corresponding to the target team (that is, the total number of engineer IDs). Note that the number of members used for correction may be limited to the number of engineers who were in operation during the target period among the engineers linked to the repository corresponding to the target team.
In this example, the server 30 may obtain a text or a numerical value as the evaluation result of the individual index. The text can be predetermined according to the relationship between the index and the reference value, for example. The numerical value depends, for example, on the relationship (eg difference or ratio) between the index and the reference value.

As an example of evaluating the development volume, the server 30 may quantitatively evaluate the development volume by integrating the "development volume" index generated in step S131 or the individual evaluation results thereof. As a first example, the server 30 may calculate the index of "development volume" or a weighted sum of its processed values (the weight may be uniform) as the evaluation result of the development volume. As a second example, the server 30 compares the "development volume" index and the reference value with a numerical value (for example, a numerical value dependent on at least one of the difference of the index from the reference value or the ratio of the index to the reference value). ), and a weighted sum of the assigned numbers (the weight may be uniform) may be calculated as the development volume evaluation result. Alternatively, the server 30 may obtain the development volume evaluation result by processing these weighted sums.

In addition, the server 30 may analyze the influence of each of the “development volume” indicators on the evaluation result of the development volume. As an example, the server 30 may derive the degree of influence as a specific numerical value, or may specify only the sign (positive or negative) of the influence. In addition, the server 30 may identify an index having a large degree of negative influence as an index requiring improvement. The index with a large degree of negative impact may include an index with a degree of negative impact exceeding a threshold or an index with a degree of negative impact within the top N1 (N1 is an arbitrary natural number). These analytical results may be included in the evaluation results.

As an example of evaluation of development efficiency, the server 30 may quantitatively evaluate development efficiency by integrating the index of "development efficiency" generated in step S131 or its individual evaluation results. As a first example, the server 30 may calculate an index of "development efficiency" or a weighted sum of its processed values (the weight may be uniform) as the development efficiency evaluation result. As a second example, the server 30 compares the "development efficiency" index and the reference value with a numerical value (for example, a numerical value dependent on at least one of the difference of the index from the reference value or the ratio of the index to the reference value). ), and a weighted sum of the assigned values (the weight may be uniform) may be calculated as the development efficiency evaluation result. Alternatively, the server 30 may obtain the development efficiency evaluation result by processing these weighted sums.

The server 30 may also analyze the influence of each of the “development efficiency” indicators on the development efficiency evaluation results. As an example, the server 30 may derive the degree of influence as a specific numerical value, or may specify only the sign (positive or negative) of the influence. In addition, the server 30 may identify an index having a large degree of negative influence as an index requiring improvement. The index with a large degree of negative impact may include an index with a degree of negative impact exceeding a threshold or an index with a degree of negative impact within the top N2 (N2 is an arbitrary natural number). These analytical results may be included in the evaluation results.

As an example of evaluating the development quality, the server 30 may quantitatively evaluate the development quality by integrating the "development quality" index generated in step S131 or the individual evaluation results thereof. As a first example, the server 30 may calculate the index of "development quality" or the weighted sum of the processed values (the weight may be uniform) as the development quality evaluation result. As a second example, the server 30 compares the "development quality" index and the reference value with a numerical value (for example, a numerical value dependent on at least one of the difference of the index from the reference value or the ratio of the index to the reference value). ), and a weighted sum of the assigned values (the weight may be uniform) may be calculated as the development quality evaluation result. Alternatively, the server 30 may obtain an evaluation result of development quality by processing these weighted sums.

In addition, the server 30 may analyze the influence of each of the “development quality” indicators on the development quality evaluation result. As an example, the server 30 may derive the degree of influence as a specific numerical value, or may specify only the sign (positive or negative) of the influence. In addition, the server 30 may identify an index having a large degree of negative influence as an index requiring improvement. The index with a large degree of negative impact may include an index with a degree of negative impact exceeding a threshold or an index with a degree of negative impact within the top N3 (N3 is an arbitrary natural number). These analytical results may be included in the evaluation results.

As a first example of comprehensive evaluation of development performance, the server 30 integrates evaluation results of at least two of development volume, development efficiency, and development quality. For example, the server 30 may calculate a weighted sum (the weight may be uniform) of a plurality of evaluation results as a comprehensive evaluation result of development performance. As a second example of comprehensive evaluation of development performance, the server 30 integrates each index generated in step S131 or its individual evaluation results. For example, the server 30 may calculate a weighted sum (the weight may be uniform) of each index or its processed value as a comprehensive evaluation result of development performance. Alternatively, the server 30 assigns a numerical value (e.g., a numerical value dependent on at least one of the difference of the index to the reference value or the ratio of the index to the reference value) to the result of the comparison between each index and the reference value, and the assigned A weighted sum of the numerical values (the weight may be uniform) may be calculated as the overall evaluation result of the development performance. Alternatively, the server 30 may obtain a comprehensive evaluation result of development performance by processing these weighted sums.

Note that the server 30 may store the derived evaluation results in a database (not shown). Accordingly, when the same target team and the same target period are specified, the server 30 can read and use the evaluation results stored in the database instead of executing the performance evaluation (S132). can. In addition, regardless of the length of the target period, the server 30 derives the evaluation result for a predetermined time unit (for example, day unit) belonging to the target period, stores it in the database, and over the time unit belonging to the target period An evaluation result for the target period may be derived by integrating the evaluation results. As a result, even if a target period that overlaps with a target period specified in the past is specified, performance evaluation (S132) can be executed by reusing the evaluation results derived in the past.

After step S132, the server 30 executes an evaluation response (S133).
Specifically, the server 30 generates an evaluation response including information for presenting the evaluation result derived in step S132 to the user of the client device 10. FIG. The server 30 transmits the generated evaluation response to the client device 10 . Here, the information for presenting the evaluation results may be information for generating a screen displayed on the display 21 by the client device 10, for example.

After step S133, the client device 10 executes information presentation (S111).
Specifically, the client device 10 receives the evaluation response transmitted in step S133 and causes the display 21 to display a screen based on the evaluation response. Thereby, the user can confirm the evaluation of the development performance in the target period by the target team specified in step S110.

As an example, the client device 10 causes the display 21 to display the screen shown in FIG. The screen of FIG. 8 includes objects J20 to J29.

Object J20 displays the name of the organization to which the target team belongs.
The object J21 displays the name of the target team (an example of information that can identify the target team). The object J21 may be configured to receive an instruction to change the target team. In this case, the user of the client device 10 is allowed to input to select one of the teams to which the user is assigned the authority to view evaluations as a new target team.

When the target team is changed, the client device 10 updates the screen of the display 21 (for example, display contents of objects J26 to J29 described later). The client device 10 may request the server 30 for information for displaying the updated screen on the display 21 (for example, the evaluation result of the target team after the change in the target period). In this case, the server 30 may perform the same processing as steps S130 to S132 regarding the changed target team. Alternatively, such information may be pre-included in the evaluation response in step S133.

The object J22 displays the start date and end date of the target period (an example of information that can specify the target period). The object J22 may be configured to receive an instruction to change the target period. In this case, the user of the client device 10 is permitted to input to change at least one of the start date and end date of the target period.

Object J23 accepts an instruction to specify the target period. When the object J23 is selected, the client device 10 displays a calendar UI (User Interface), and the user can input to specify the target period on the calendar UI.

When the target period is changed, the client device 10 updates the screen of the display 21 (for example, display contents of objects J26 to J29 described later). The client device 10 may request the server 30 for information for displaying the updated screen on the display 21 (for example, the evaluation result of the target team in the target period after the change). In this case, the server 30 may perform the same processing as steps S130 to S132 regarding the target period after the change. Alternatively, such information may be pre-included in the evaluation response in step S133.

The object J24 accepts an instruction to switch to a screen showing comparison results between the target team and other teams. When the object J24 is selected, the client device 10 switches the screen of the display 21 .

When the object J24 is selected, the client device 10 displays information (e.g., indicators of other teams to be compared or evaluation results) for displaying a screen after switching on the display 21 (e.g., the screen of FIG. 10 to be described later). information) may be requested from the server 30 . In this case, the server 30 may perform the same processes as steps S130 to S132 regarding the other team. Alternatively, such information may be pre-included in the evaluation response in step S133.

The object J25 accepts an instruction to switch to a screen that compares the evaluation results of the target team in chronological order. When the object J25 is selected, the client device 10 switches the screen of the display 21 .

When the object J25 is selected, the client device 10 displays information (e.g., evaluation results in a period other than the target period of the target team) for displaying a screen after switching on the display 21 (eg, a screen of FIG. 11 to be described later). information) may be requested from the server 30 . In this case, the server 30 may perform the same processes as steps S130 to S132 for periods other than the target period. Alternatively, such information may be pre-included in the evaluation response in step S133.

The object J26 displays the overall development performance evaluation result, the development volume evaluation result, the development efficiency evaluation result, and the development quality evaluation result by the target team during the target period. In the example of FIG. 8, the overall evaluation result of the development performance is expressed by an arbitrary level of rating (the number of stars in the example of FIG. 8, but alphabetical ranks such as SABCD may also be used). , and other evaluation results are expressed in increments of 0.1 points with a maximum of 100 points. However, these expressions are merely examples, and any evaluation result may be expressed in any manner. For example, each evaluation result may be expressed as an index (for example, a deviation value) representing the distance from the average value. In this case, the actual statistical value may be used as the average value or the standard deviation, or a predetermined value may be used.

The object J27 displays individual evaluation results of the "development volume" index. In the example of FIG. 8, the object J27 displays text expressing individual evaluation results for each index. Furthermore, in object J27, texts corresponding to indicators that have a positive effect on the evaluation results of the development volume are placed in the [Good] column, and texts corresponding to indicators that have a negative impact on the evaluation results of the development volume are placed in the [Good] column. It is placed in the [Bad] column. In other words, the user can easily determine which index had a positive or negative impact.

Also, the object J27 includes an object J27a. When the object J27a is selected, the client device 10 displays the details of the individual evaluation result of the "development volume" index. As an example, the client device 10 displays a graph. The graph may, for example, visually compare the value of any "development volume" indicator or its processed value with the corresponding reference value. The index represented by the graph may be switched according to a user instruction. An example graph is shown in FIG.

The graph in FIG. 9 represents the number of merged pull requests against the number of members. The asterisks in FIG. 9 are data points representing the number of members of the target team and the number of merged pull requests during the target period. Also, the black circle marks in FIG. 9 are other data points. Other data points include, for example, at least one of the following:
・Data points representing the number of members of other teams and the number of merged pull requests during the target period ・Data points representing the number of members of the target team and the number of merged pull requests during the non-target period ・Other teams during the non-target period data points representing the number of members and merged pull requests in

The straight line in FIG. 9 represents a regression line when the number of members working within the target period is used as an explanatory variable and the number of merged pull requests is used as an objective variable. A regression line is derived by calculating a linear regression on the data points corresponding to asterisks and bullets. By checking the graph in FIG. 9, the user can see that the number of merged pull requests of the target team in the target period is the predicted value for the number of members (that is, the value corresponding to the number of members of the target team on the regression line, and the reference It is possible to grasp the degree of superiority compared to (example of value). The server 30 can display other indicators in a similar manner. In addition, instead of the number of members who were active during the target period, the total number of members belonging to each team (that is, the number of engineers linked to the repository corresponding to each team) can be used as an explanatory variable. . Also, the number of merged pull requests corresponding to the number of members may be approximated by a regression curve instead of a regression line. Furthermore, the function used for approximation may be selectable by the operator of the information processing system 1, for example.

The object J28 displays individual evaluation results of the "development efficiency" index. In the example of FIG. 8, the object J28 displays text expressing individual evaluation results for each index. Furthermore, in the object 27, texts corresponding to indicators that have a positive impact on the development efficiency evaluation results are placed in the [Good] column, and texts corresponding to indicators that have a negative impact on the development efficiency evaluation results are placed in the [Good] column. It is placed in the [Bad] column.

Object J28 also includes object J28a. When the object J28a is selected, the client device 10 displays the details of the individual evaluation result of the "development efficiency" index. As an example, the client device 10 displays a graph. The graph may, for example, visually compare the value of any "development volume" indicator or its processed value with the corresponding reference value. The index represented by the graph may be switched according to a user instruction.

Object J29 displays individual evaluation results of the "development quality" index. Although not shown, the object J29 displays text expressing individual evaluation results for each index. Furthermore, in the object 27, texts corresponding to indicators that have a positive effect on the development quality evaluation results are placed in the [Good] column, and texts corresponding to indicators that have a negative effect on the development quality evaluation results are placed in the [Good] column. It is placed in the [Bad] column.

Also, the object J29 includes an object J29a. When the object J29a is selected, the client device 10 displays the details of the individual evaluation result of the "development quality" index. As an example, the client device 10 displays a graph. The graph may, for example, visually compare the value of any "development volume" indicator or its processed value with the corresponding reference value. The index represented by the graph may be switched according to a user instruction.

As described above, the client device 10 can display the screen of FIG. 10 on the display 21 when the object J24 is selected, for example. The screen of FIG. 10 includes objects J20-23, J25, J30-J31. Objects J20-23 and J25 are as described above.

The object J30 accepts an instruction to switch to the screen showing the evaluation summary of the target team (for example, the screen of FIG. 8). When the object J30 is selected, the client device 10 switches the screen of the display 21 .

The object J31 displays a graph (radar chart) that visually expresses the evaluation result of the target team in the target period and the evaluation result of the comparison partner in the target period in comparison. In the example of FIG. 10, the evaluation results include the comprehensive evaluation result of development performance, and the evaluation results of development volume, development efficiency, and development quality, but these are only examples. Also, the type of graph is not limited to the radar chart. The evaluation result of the comparison partner may be any of the following.
・Average, median, or mode of all other teams' evaluation results, or statistical numerical ranges based on these (e.g., interquartile range)
・Average, median, or mode of evaluation results of other specified multiple teams, or a statistical numerical range based on these ・Average, median, or maximum of evaluation results of other randomly selected multiple teams Frequent values, or statistical numerical ranges based on these, evaluation results of other specific teams

The team to be compared may be specified by the user, or may be determined based on the development field or industry of the target team. The team to be compared may be another team belonging to the organization to which the target team belongs, or may be another team belonging to a different organization. When a team to be a comparison partner (including a candidate for comparison partner) belongs to an organization different from that of the target team, the server 30 may provide information on the team in an anonymized state. In addition, the server 30 may set whether or not to provide the information of the target team for comparison with the teams belonging to other organizations, and the conditions for providing the information in accordance with user instructions.

Although not shown, the screen of FIG. 10 also visually expresses the evaluation results of the individual indexes of each category of the target team during the target period and the evaluation results of the individual indexes of each category of the comparison partner during the target period. It can contain objects that display graphs.

As described above, the client device 10 can display the screen of FIG. 11 on the display 21 when the object J25 is selected, for example. The screen of FIG. 11 includes objects J20-24, J30, J40-J42. Objects J20-24 and J30 are as described above.

The object J40 displays a graph (line graph) that visually expresses the evaluation result of the target team in the target period and the evaluation result of the target team in a period different from the target period in comparison. In the example of FIG. 11, the evaluation results include comprehensive evaluation results of development performance and evaluation results of development volume, development efficiency, and development quality, but these are merely examples. Also, the type of graph is not limited to the line graph.

Object J41 accepts a user instruction specifying the number of analysis units forming the graph displayed on object J40. Here, the unit of analysis refers to the temporal range over which the assessment is made, typically either days, weeks, months, quarters or years.
Object J42 accepts a user instruction specifying the analysis unit that constitutes the graph displayed on object J40.
That is, in the example of FIG. 11, the graph displayed on the object J40 includes the evaluation results for each month over four months.

When the number of analysis units or the analysis unit is changed, the client device 10 updates the screen of the display 21 (for example, the display contents of the object J40). The client device 10 may request the server 30 for information for displaying the updated screen on the display 21 (for example, the evaluation result of the target team in the target period after the change). In this case, the server 30 may perform the same processing as steps S130 to S132 regarding the target period after the change. Alternatively, such information may be included in advance in the response received from the server 30 before the screen of FIG. 11 is displayed.

Although not shown, the screen of FIG. 11 further displays the evaluation result of the individual index of each category of the target team during the target period and the evaluation result of the individual index of each category of the target team during a period different from the target period. It can contain objects that display graphical representations.

(5) Summary As described above, the server 30 of the present embodiment uses the external system 50 by a member belonging to the target team, and is stored in the external system 50. Based on the member's development activity information, Then, a plurality of indicators regarding the development performance of the target team are generated, and the development performance of the target team is evaluated based on the indicators. This makes it possible to appropriately evaluate the development performance of the target team based on the multifaceted analysis of the development activity information of the members of the target team through a plurality of indicators.

The plurality of metrics may relate to at least one of development volume, development efficiency, or development quality. Thereby, the development performance by the target team can be evaluated from the viewpoint of at least one of development volume, development efficiency, and development quality.

When at least one of a plurality of indices corresponds to a specific index, the server 30 may evaluate the specific index based on the number of members included in the target team. This makes it possible to evaluate a specific index while suppressing the influence of the size of the members included in the target team.

The server 30 may quantitatively evaluate at least one of the target team's development volume, development efficiency, development quality, or overall development performance. This allows the development performance of the target team to be expressed in a form that is easy to compare.

The server 30 may analyze the impact of at least one of the multiple indicators on at least one quantitative evaluation of the target team's development volume, development efficiency, development quality, or overall development performance. This makes it possible to identify how much each index affects the final evaluation result. In addition, the server 30 analyzes whether at least one of the plurality of indicators has a positive or negative impact on at least one quantitative evaluation of the target team's development volume, development efficiency, development quality, or overall development performance. may This allows the target team's strengths or weaknesses to be identified.

The server 30 may evaluate each index individually by comparing at least one of the plurality of indices with a reference value. This makes it possible to provide materials for judging whether each index is good or bad.

The server 30 may compare the development performance evaluation results of the target team with the development performance evaluation results of other teams or the development performance evaluation results of the target team in different periods. As a result, it is possible to provide materials for judging whether the evaluation result of the development performance by the target team is good or bad.

The development activity information may include information that can identify activities performed by members belonging to the target team and information that can identify the date and time when the activities were performed with respect to the source code stored in the external system 50. good. This makes it possible to create an appropriate index.

(6) Other Modifications The storage device 11 may be connected to the client device 10 via the network NW. The display 21 may be integrated with the client device 10 . Storage device 31 may be connected to server 30 via network NW.

Each step of the information processing described above can be executed by either the client device 10 or the server 30 . For example, the client device 10 may execute the processing described as being executed by the server 30 .

Also, in the above description, an example of executing each step in information processing in a specific order has been shown, but the execution order of each step is not limited to the example described as long as there is no dependency.

In the above description, an example of analyzing the influence of at least one of a plurality of indicators on at least one quantitative evaluation of the target team's development volume, development efficiency, development quality, or overall development performance has been shown. In this case, the server 30 may analyze the index that has the greatest negative impact on the quantitative evaluation. This will allow you to identify your team's biggest weaknesses. In this modified example, the information about the index with the largest negative impact may be presented with emphasis, for example, compared to the information about the other indices. Similar processing is also possible for positive influences.

In the above description, an example was shown in which the client device 10 requests the evaluation of the target team according to the user's instruction. However, the server 30 may repeatedly evaluate the target team (for example, at predetermined intervals) without depending on the evaluation request from the client device 10 . In addition, the server 30, if a predetermined condition is satisfied for the target team's evaluation result (for example, at least one quantitative evaluation result of the target team's development volume, development efficiency, development quality, or overall development performance) may be notified, for example, to the user. The predetermined condition may be, for example, that the evaluation result is below a threshold. Notification may be made on the app screen or website screen, or by email or other message (e.g., SNS (Social Networking Service) message, SMS (Short Message Service) message, etc.). may The notification may include information indicating that a predetermined condition has been established, or may include information on the evaluation result (or part of it) of the development performance of the target team. As a result, the user can quickly grasp the development performance of the target team when the predetermined condition is satisfied without actively and frequently checking the development performance of the target team.

The above explanation shows an example of evaluating the development performance of the target team. The server 30 evaluates the development performance of the organization based on at least one of a plurality of indicators generated for each of all teams belonging to the same organization, or evaluation results of development performance of each of all teams belonging to the organization. You may As a first example, the server 30 integrates the evaluation results of each team. For example, the server 30 may calculate a weighted sum (the weight may be uniform) of the evaluation results of each team as the overall evaluation result of the development performance of the organization. As a second example, the server 30 integrates each index generated for each team or its individual evaluation results. For example, the server 30 may calculate a weighted sum (the weight may be uniform) of each index or its processed value as a comprehensive evaluation result of the development performance of the organization. Alternatively, the server 30 assigns a numerical value (e.g., a numerical value dependent on at least one of the difference of the index to the reference value or the ratio of the index to the reference value) to the result of the comparison between each index and the reference value, and the assigned A weighted sum (the weight may be uniform) of the numerical values obtained may be calculated as the overall evaluation result of the development performance of the organization. Alternatively, the server 30 may process these weighted sums to obtain a comprehensive evaluation result of the organization's development performance. As a result, it is possible to appropriately evaluate the development performance of an organization composed of one or more teams.

The server 30 may publish the job information of the organization to which the target team belongs, including the evaluation result of the development performance by the target team. Alternatively, the server 30 may publish job information of the organization including evaluation results of development performance by the organization to which the target team belongs. As a result, the evaluation result of the development performance of the target team or organization can be used as material for appealing the organization to job seekers. As a further modification, the server 30 may disclose job information including the evaluation result only when a predetermined condition is satisfied for the evaluation result. For example, the predetermined condition may be that the evaluation result exceeds a threshold. As a result, it is possible to prevent disclosure of job offer information containing poor evaluation results (that is, evaluation results that are not appealing to job seekers). Note that the processing described in this modification may be executed in cooperation with the server 30 and an external device (for example, a server in a recruiting system). In this case, the external device acquires evaluation results of development performance by the target team or organization from the server 30 .

The server 30 may publish the ranking of evaluation results of development performance by each team. Alternatively, the server 30 may publish the ranking of evaluation results of development performance by each organization. Rankings may be aggregated by team or organization attributes. Team attributes include, for example, size or development area. Attributes of an organization include, for example, size, age, industry, or headquarters location. As a further modification, the server 30 may exclude information on teams or organizations ranked lower than a predetermined rank from being disclosed. Note that the processing described in this modification may be executed in cooperation with the server 30 and an external device. In this case, the external device acquires evaluation results of development performance by each team or each organization from the server 30 .

In the above explanation, an example of evaluating development quality as an independent item was shown. However, we exclude development quality from the evaluation and instead use the "development quality" metric (e.g. average number of lines of change involved) to adjust the evaluation of other items (e.g. development volume). good too. Specifically, a correction may be made to weight the development volume index (for example, the number of pull requests created) based on the development quality index. Weighting can be performed, for example, by multiplying the development volume index by a larger correction coefficient as the evaluation of the development quality index is higher (for example, closer to the proper value).

The server 30 calculates the evaluation result of the target team or organization in the target period and the ratio or amount of change (for example, improvement) with respect to the evaluation result of the target team or organization in the past period, and presents the calculation results to the user. good too.

(7) Supplementary Note The items described in the embodiment and the modified example are additionally noted below.

(Appendix 1)
a computer (30);
Means (S130) for acquiring information on development activities by members belonging to the team, which is stored in the issue management service (50) by using the issue management service (50);
means for generating a plurality of indicators based on information on development activities (S131);
Means for evaluating development performance by the team based on a plurality of indicators (S132);
means for outputting evaluation results of development performance by the team (S133);
A program that acts as

(Appendix 2)
The multiple indicators relate to at least one of development volume, development efficiency, or development quality,
A program according to Appendix 1.

(Appendix 3)
The means for evaluating the development performance by the team evaluates the specific index based on the number of members included in the team when at least one of the multiple indices corresponds to the specific index.
A program according to Appendix 1.

(Appendix 4)
The means for evaluating development performance by the team quantitatively evaluates at least one of development volume, development efficiency, development quality, or overall development performance of the team,
A program according to Appendix 1.

(Appendix 5)
A means of evaluating a team's development performance is based on at least one of the following: number of pull requests created, number of merged pull requests, number of reviews, number of pull requests reviewed, number of coding, number of commits, or number of merges to the main branch. Quantitatively evaluate the development volume,
A program according to Appendix 4.

(Appendix 6)
Means for evaluating development performance by a team are: average time for team member to do first review, average time from pull request creation to merge or close, average time from first commit to pull request creation, pull request creation to review, average time from first review to close, average time from first review to last approval, average time from last approval to merge, from creation of merged pull request to main branch Quantitatively evaluate team development efficiency based on at least one of the mean time to merge and/or the mean time to merge from the first commit associated with a pull request that has been merged into the main branch;
A program according to Appendix 4.

(Appendix 7)
Means for evaluating development performance by a team are: percentage of pull requests merged without review, change failure rate, average number of comments per pull request, average number of lines changed per pull request, or number of files changed per pull request, Quantitatively evaluate the development quality of the team based on at least one of
A program according to Appendix 4.

(Appendix 8)
further functioning the computer as a means of analyzing the impact of at least one of the plurality of indicators on a quantitative assessment of at least one of the team's development volume, development efficiency, development quality, or overall development performance;
A program according to Appendix 4.

(Appendix 9)
Further, the computer as a means for analyzing whether at least one of the plurality of indicators had a positive or negative impact on at least one quantitative evaluation of the team's development volume, development efficiency, development quality, or overall development performance. make it work,
A program according to Appendix 8.

(Appendix 10)
further functioning the computer as a means of analyzing the indicators with the greatest negative impact on at least one quantitative assessment of the team's development volume, development efficiency, development quality, or overall development performance;
A program according to Appendix 8.

(Appendix 11)
further functioning the computer as a means of notifying when predetermined conditions are met regarding the results of a quantitative evaluation of at least one of the team's development volume, development efficiency, development quality, or overall development performance;
A program according to Appendix 4.

(Appendix 12)
The means of evaluating the development performance by the team is to compare at least one of the multiple indicators with a reference value to evaluate the indicator individually.
A program according to Appendix 1.

(Appendix 13)
further functioning the computer as a means of comparing the team's development performance evaluation results with other teams' development performance evaluation results or with the team's development performance evaluation results at different time periods;
12. The program according to Appendix 12.

(Appendix 14)
A computer as a means of evaluating the development performance of an organization based on at least one of a plurality of indicators generated for each of all teams belonging to the organization, or evaluation results of development performance of each of all teams belonging to the organization. make it work more
A program according to Appendix 1.

(Appendix 15)
further functioning of the computer as a means of publishing job openings for the organization to which the team belongs, including evaluation results of development performance by the team;
A program according to Appendix 1.

(Appendix 16)
Information on development activities includes information that can identify activities performed by members belonging to the team regarding the source code stored in the issue management service, and information that can identify the date and time when the activities were performed.
A program according to Appendix 1.

(Appendix 17)
Means (S130) for acquiring information on development activities by members belonging to the team, which is stored in the issue management service (50) by using the issue management service (50);
means for generating a plurality of indicators based on information about development activities (S131);
An information processing apparatus comprising: means for evaluating development performance by a team based on a plurality of indices (S132); and means for outputting evaluation results of the development performance by the team (S133).

(Appendix 18)
An information processing system (1) comprising a client device (10) and a server (30),
The server
Means (S130) for acquiring information on development activities by members belonging to the team, which is stored in the issue management service (50) by using the issue management service (50);
means for generating a plurality of indicators based on information about development activities (S131);
Means (S132) for evaluating development performance by the team based on a plurality of indicators;
The client device comprises means (S111) for presenting evaluation results of development performance by the team,
Information processing system.

(Appendix 19)
means for receiving evaluation results of development performance by the team;
means for presenting the evaluation result (S111);
The evaluation result is a result of evaluating the development performance by the team based on a plurality of indicators,
The plurality of indicators are generated based on information related to development activities by members belonging to the team, which is stored in an issue management service (50) by members belonging to the team using the issue management service.
Information processing device (10).

(Appendix 20)
A method for causing a client device (10) to execute information processing,
to the client device,
a process of receiving evaluation results of development performance by the team;
Execute the processing (S111) of presenting the evaluation result and
The evaluation result is the result of evaluating the development performance by the team based on multiple indicators,
The plurality of indicators are generated based on information about development activities by members belonging to the team, which is stored in the issue management service (50) by using the issue management service (50);
Method.

Although the embodiments of the present invention have been described in detail above, the scope of the present invention is not limited to the above embodiments. Also, the above embodiments can be modified and modified in various ways without departing from the gist of the present invention. Also, the above embodiments and modifications can be combined.

1 : Information processing system 10 : Client device 11 : Storage device 12 : Processor 13 : Input/output interface 14 : Communication interface 21 : Display 30 : Server 31 : Storage device 32 : Processor 33 : Input/output interface 34 : Communication interface 50 : External system

Claims (20)

the computer,
Means for obtaining information on development activities by team members stored in the issue management service by members belonging to the team using the issue management service;
means for generating a plurality of indicators based on information about said development activity;
means for evaluating development performance by said team based on said plurality of indicators;
means for outputting development performance evaluation results by the team;
function as
The means for acquiring information about the development activity is a repository owned by the issue management service, which identifies a first repository associated with the team, and a member belonging to the team uses the issue management service. obtaining information about development activity by the member stored in the first repository;
program. the computer,
Means for obtaining information on development activities by team members stored in the issue management service by members belonging to the team using the issue management service;
means for generating a plurality of indicators based on information about said development activity;
means for evaluating development performance by said team based on said plurality of indicators;
means for outputting development performance evaluation results by the team;
function as
Means for evaluating the development performance of the team include the average time for a member of the team to do an initial review, the average time from pull request creation to being merged or closed, the average time from first commit to pull request creation, Average time from pull request creation to review, average time from first review to close, average time from first review to last approval, average time from last approval to merge, number of merged pull requests to main branch Quantitatively assessing the team's development efficiency based on at least one of the average time from creation to merge, or the average time from the first commit to merge associated with a pull request merged into the main branch;
program. The plurality of indicators relate to at least one of development volume, development efficiency, or development quality,
3. The program according to claim 1 or 2 . The means for evaluating development performance by the team evaluates the specific index based on the number of members included in the team when at least one of the plurality of indicators corresponds to a specific index.
3. The program according to claim 1 or 2 . The means for evaluating development performance by the team quantitatively evaluates at least one of development volume, development efficiency, development quality, or overall development performance of the team.
3. The program according to claim 1 or 2 . said means for evaluating development performance by said team based on at least one of: number of pull requests created, number of merged pull requests, number of reviews, number of pull requests reviewed, number of coding, number of commits, or number of merges to main branch; Quantitatively evaluate the development volume of the team,
6. A program according to claim 5 . The means of evaluating development performance by the team are the percentage of pull requests merged without review, change failure rate, average number of comments per pull request, average number of lines changed per pull request, or number of files changed per pull request. quantitatively assessing the development quality of the team based on at least one of
6. A program according to claim 5 . The computer further functions as a means for analyzing the impact of at least one of the plurality of indicators on at least one quantitative evaluation of development volume, development efficiency, development quality, or overall development performance of the team. ,
6. A program according to claim 5 . means for analyzing whether at least one of the plurality of indicators had a positive or negative impact on a quantitative evaluation of at least one of development volume, development efficiency, development quality, or overall development performance of the team, with the computer; , to further act as
9. A program according to claim 8. Further functioning the computer as a means of analyzing the index with the greatest negative impact on at least one quantitative evaluation of development volume, development efficiency, development quality, or overall development performance of the team;
9. A program according to claim 8. further functioning the computer as a means for notifying when a predetermined condition is met for at least one quantitative evaluation result of development volume, development efficiency, development quality, or overall development performance of the team;
6. A program according to claim 5 . The means for evaluating development performance by the team individually evaluates at least one of the plurality of indicators by comparing the indicator with a reference value.
3. The program according to claim 1 or 2 . further causing the computer to act as a means for comparing development performance evaluation results by the team with development performance evaluation results by other teams or development performance evaluation results by the team at different time periods;
13. A program according to claim 12. Means for evaluating the development performance of the organization based on at least one of a plurality of indicators generated for each of all teams belonging to the organization, or evaluation results of development performance of each of all teams belonging to the organization. to further function as
3. The program according to claim 1 or 2 . Further functioning the computer as a means of publishing job information for the organization to which the team belongs, including evaluation results of development performance by the team;
3. The program according to claim 1 or 2 . The information on the development activity includes information that can identify the activity performed by the member belonging to the team and information that can identify the date and time when the activity was performed with respect to the source code stored in the issue management service. including,
3. The program according to claim 1 or 2 . a means for acquiring information on development activities by members belonging to the team, which is stored in the issue management service by using the issue management service;
means for generating a plurality of indicators based on information about the development activity;
means for evaluating development performance by the team based on the plurality of indicators; and means for outputting evaluation results of the development performance by the team ;
The means for acquiring information about the development activity is a repository owned by the issue management service, which identifies a first repository associated with the team, and a member belonging to the team uses the issue management service. obtaining information about development activity by the member stored in the first repository;
Information processing equipment. An information processing system comprising a client device and a server,
The server is
a means for acquiring information on development activities by members belonging to the team, which is stored in the issue management service by using the issue management service;
means for generating a plurality of indicators based on information about the development activity;
means for evaluating development performance by the team based on the plurality of indicators;
The means for acquiring information about the development activity is a repository owned by the issue management service, which identifies a first repository associated with the team, and a member belonging to the team uses the issue management service. obtaining information about development activities by the member stored in the first repository;
The client device comprises means for presenting evaluation results of development performance by the team.
Information processing system. a means for acquiring information on development activities by members belonging to the team, which is stored in the issue management service by using the issue management service;
means for generating a plurality of indicators based on information about the development activity;
means for evaluating development performance by the team based on the plurality of indicators; and means for outputting evaluation results of the development performance by the team ;
Means for evaluating the development performance of the team include the average time for a member of the team to do an initial review, the average time from pull request creation to being merged or closed, the average time from first commit to pull request creation, Average time from pull request creation to review, average time from first review to close, average time from first review to last approval, average time from last approval to merge, number of merged pull requests to main branch Quantitatively assessing the team's development efficiency based on at least one of the average time from creation to merge, or the average time from the first commit to merge associated with a pull request merged into the main branch;
Information processing equipment. An information processing system comprising a client device and a server,
The server is
a means for acquiring information on development activities by members belonging to the team, which is stored in the issue management service by using the issue management service;
means for generating a plurality of indicators based on information about the development activity;
means for evaluating development performance by the team based on the plurality of indicators;
Means for evaluating the development performance of the team include the average time for a member of the team to do an initial review, the average time from pull request creation to being merged or closed, the average time from first commit to pull request creation, Average time from pull request creation to review, average time from first review to close, average time from first review to last approval, average time from last approval to merge, number of merged pull requests to main branch Quantitatively assessing the development efficiency of the team based on at least one of the average time from creation to merge, or the average time from the first commit to merge associated with a pull request merged to the main branch;
The client device comprises means for presenting evaluation results of development performance by the team.
Information processing system.

Images