Every commit scored for change-risk against this repo's own history, so 'elevated' means elevated here rather than on some global curve.
Needs review
0 commits sit in this repo's top risk tercile, which is 0% of the 1scored. The cut is drawn against this codebase's own history rather than a global curve, so a quiet repo still fills its top band. What pushes a commit up is size and spread together: a large change confined to one area scores below a smaller one scattered across a dozen files.
Commit categories over time, read off the subject line. Fixes carry the accent because that is the series this chart exists to show.
How this repo's commit mix shifts over time.
Ranked by change-risk, highest first. Priority is a tercile of this repo's own distribution, so a quiet repo still fills its top band.
| # | Commit | Author | When | Lines | Review priority | Top driver |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 941a0978Initial commit | Kristen Gerring | 10y ago | +22 -0 | 50thTypical | more lines added than baseline |
Two views of the same model: where the cuts fall, and what commit shape lands you above them.
Every scored commit, binned on the raw 0 to 10 score rather than the percentile. Percentile ranks are uniform by construction, so that axis has no shape to draw. The dashed lines are the tercile cuts behind each row's priority pill.
The 1 most recent commits, on their own recency sample rather than the feed above: that defaults to risk-sorted, so reusing it would plot only the top tercile and call it the spread. Big and scattered is what the model penalises. Click a dot to open it.
KGerring/pyconcepts has 1 commits in its history from 1 contributor, the first of them Mar 22, 2016. Every commit is scored for change risk from its size, spread and the history of the files it touches.
