Hacker News Reader

Thanks for the thoughtful question. The tool doesn’t aim to declare what’s “important,” but rather to highlight patterns. like hotspots, dormant code, or contributor trends. that can guide refactoring, onboarding, or even just curiosity. For some workflows (e.g. legacy cleanup, team handover, bug tracking), that context can be quite valuable.

View on HN

> The tool doesn’t aim to declare what’s “important,” but rather to highlight patterns

I guess my question then is why should someone care about these patterns that are explicitly not what's "important"?

You say things like

"can guide refactoring, onboarding"

and

"For some workflows (e.g. legacy cleanup, team handover, bug tracking), that context can be quite valuable."

But those are vague hand-wavy statements that don't explain themselves. I don't understand why it would be valuable for those tasks, and I could use some explanation of what concrete problem is solved by looking at these details.

I tried the tool and would like to use it to track team KPIs such as 'Commit regularly in small increments' with the JSON export it provides. Or to track pairing and mobbing. Currently, we use a script that goes through the commits and searches for >1 authors.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com