Before we switched off korma.wmflabs.org in Feb 2017, its `code_contrib_new_gone.html` page listed
* People with first submission in last three months
* Contributors that have not contributed in the last 6 months
I irregularly checked the first list and ping on patches without review, but
* we do not use the available information in a process incorporated to our routines.
* except for anecdotes, we do not know or understand why people move on.
We should think about
* plan a process that allows more regular checking to get the attention of reviewers for patches by newcomers
* potentially congratulate the contributor after merging the first patch and provide motivation and hints to try and find a second task to work on,
* ask ourselves if we really want to wait six months for users leaving to get aware of them or whether to shorten that time frame,
* ask users who leave / have left to give us quick feedback and help improving, potentially via #surveys.
To sort out:
* Sample selection? Contact everybody, or if not, how to select the sample?
* Legal issues: Data use; where and how to publish results (anonymously?)
* Questions and format (quantitative, qualitative)?
** exploratory := no propositions, open questions, hypothesis building = problem not clearly defined
** descriptive := survey, who, what, where, how many, how much.
** explanatory := causal=experiment; case study=how, why
Context: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Technical_Collaboration/Strategy mentions "offering a learning environment and growth path to technical contributors".
As per June 2017, this is currently blocked (stalled) on having similar (Gerrit) data on https://wikimedia.biterg.io (see T151161).