New Enhanced Repo Insights Views

[j0siepy]

We've updated two of the repo insights views - contributors and code frequency - enables improved focus navigation to support point-by-point navigation, the ability to hide a series by interacting with the chart legend, as well as the ability to view and download the data as a CSV or PNG.

Contributors

• Click and drag date range selection has been replaced by a date range picker. The previous experience required mouse input and was not discoverable, while the new experience is always visible and navigable by keyboard.
• The current date range is more explicitly listed under the heading
• The contributor cards are now more responsive on small screens. The previous experience was locked to a 2 column view, where the new experience will wrap to a single column layout.
  Note: Contributor data is still a weekly rollup of commits.

Code frequency

• The 2 different axes are now differentiated by line style, as well as color.
• Data points are navigable and show more detail in a tooltip, previously you could only reference against the axes visually.

👂Try Out Our New Charts and Share Your Feedback!
We invite you to test our new charts and let us know how they work for you. If you have specific feedback, we’d love to hear it! Questions are encouraged too!

🤝 Share Your Experience
Have you encountered any issues related to the size and variation of data specific to your repositories?

📋Help Us Prioritize Updates
We are in the process of updating charts on GitHub and need your input! Which other charts would you find most valuable to update first?

If you would like to provide feedback anonymously, feel free to use this form.

To revert this update, click on your profile picture in the top right corner of the page, go to the feature preview menu, select “Enhanced Repo Insights Views” and click disable. If you choose to turn this feature off – please let us know why using the link listed above!

Update: February 10th, 2025

Thank you for sharing your thoughts and feedback on these updates. We’ve carefully reviewed all the input from this discussion and other channels, and we appreciate the insights you’ve provided.

Based on your feedback, we’re excited to share that we’ve made several updates:

• Keyboard-navigable date range selector - You can once again select date ranges using either your mouse or keyboard for improved accessibility. The available date ranges remain weekly (Sunday to Sunday), and we will only display contributors active within the selected timeframe.
• Users are sorted once again by contribution - This means that organization members will be displayed in order of their contributions, making it easier to see who is actively engaging within the organization.
• Sharable URLs for specific views - The URL now reflects the selected time period, making it easy to share or bookmark a particular view.
• Switched from a line graph to a bar graph - We’ve updated the visualization to a bar graph for better clarity and readability.

We know there were additional requests, and while we aren’t able to implement everything, we’re continuously evaluating ways to improve the experience. For now, these changes are available in feature preview, so please test them out and keep sharing your feedback! The updates will become the default experience in the coming week.

Thanks again for your valuable input, we appreciate your collaboration in making GitHub better!

[HodPrik]

Good.Veri good!

[Elphazy]

+100
The old chart to be reinstated as the new chart has issues like unable to zoom.

[admin404nextfloor]

Хорошо.Очень хорошо!

[eusoumanoelnetto]

eu não estou aparecendo

[p-12199]

am not showing up

[sebthom]

Although I appreciate the ability to hover over the graph and view a tooltip with details, I am not pleased with the other design changes.

1. The new graphs look very blurry and agitated. They also lack dates on the horizontal for better orientation without first having to hover around. Just compare the following screenshots. The new graph looks like a wave form of a distorted sound signal and because of the too thick lines it is harder to see what's going on.

2. The old graph had the ability to zoom using a sliding window into interesting areas. This feature is missing on the new version and you only have a dropdown list where you can select some fixed time frames. You can no longer zoom into a 3 month time frame two years ago.

3. The absence of the light gray background on all the tiles now makes the entire page look bland and dull.

4. In the updated design, the list of contributors now lists everyone, including those with 0 commits within the selected time frame. In the previous design, only contributors who were active during the chosen period were shown.

[shkesar]

+1 Lines are very thick. The color pops out too much.

[hgy59]

2. The old graph had the ability to zoom using a sliding window into interesting areas. This feature is missing on the new version and you only have a dropdown list where you can select some fixed time frames. You can no longer zoom into a 3 month time frame two years ago.

If you insist on the dropdown list, the list needs an additional entry to define custom start and end time.
However, selecting by mouse is much more convenient.

Otherwise the Contributors page has no value for me anymore....

[pkazmier]

Agreed. The new graphs are not as sharp and crisp as the old ones.

[jrafanie]

Agreed on the graph drawing looking terrible. The Y axis range selection is wrong as it appears to pick values that don't have all data points on the graph. Perhaps that's why the lines are blurry/agitated? That, plus the line is just too thick. I don't know. There's so many examples in this issue showing the superior graph drawing before. Hover over on the old graph might be useful but not how they're drawn now.

I like the hover over tooltip type behavior but I don't understand why the hover over for a specific date on the top graph doesn't do anything with the contributors below it. For my repo, I can see 20 commits on a specific day but hovering over it I can't see who contributed on that day because the hover over doesn't seem to affect the contributor list below it. I guess I don't see the point for the hover over for a date if it doesn't really do much.

I like the mouse data selection but ignoring that, the graphs are not very helpful to me.

I had to revert back to the original version. Hopefully, they can address many of the most common problems listed here.

[jpellman]

Click and drag date range selection has been replaced by a date range picker.

Why can't we have both? The click and drag date selection felt extremely intuitive and natural and this new UI update feels like a clunky regression. Having the option to select predefined ranges would be an improvement though in my view.

[chadwhitacre]

The click and drag date selection felt extremely intuitive and natural and this new UI update feels like a clunky regression.

Click-and-drag date selection is was a very common action for me on the contributors tab. For example, I am researching an upcoming podcast guest's past work and I clicked into contributors for a certain project that they supposedly founded 10+ years ago, and through long habit I had clicked and dragged to highlight the early years of the project on where the old chart used to be before realizing that my cheese was no longer there. 🐭

[AJenbo]

It's useful when you are looking performance of someone who started 9 months ago, which isn't an option in the drop down.

[helen]

Both range selection and the date picker are there now! This was unfortunately a significant issue for a number of users in the previous charts and one of several reasons we sought to modernize the underlying library, where the click and drag interaction was only usable with a mouse, not keyboard and I believe not with touch either although that I may not be remembering correctly. It took some time to figure out how to get to a usable solution, so while different from before, hopefully with having better interactivity for more scenarios and the bonus of being in the URL with these changes we'll find this to be a net improvement.

[gsum]

Two Issues with the New Design:

1. Previously, the graph allowed for selecting specific time periods by simply dragging, which is no longer possible.
2. Looking through contributions in the individual's table, we could figure out when a person came to the org and left, now it is not possible.

[dumpstarlife]

Agreed.
Also, contributions for the other repo has been turned off or switched to a close knit group.

[norwd]

I feel like the designers got a little carried away with this one, not that I don't appreciate visual changes, but this was a functional feature that I used almost daily at work and now the information I need isn't accessible in the new view.

• When I hover over the code frequency graph, half the graph is almost invisible (at least in dark mode). And the fact that as I move the cursor it flickers between showing additions and deletions, which is distracting (and potentially dangerous for those with epilepsy).
  
• The dotted line for deletions is also very difficult to read when the line is too sharp, which happens in many repos when changes only happen in bursts.
  
• For the contributors graph, previously there was the ability to select a range and drag it to keep the same time period but see the changes as new people joined and old people left a project. The new view allows me to view the number of commits on a given day, but not to see trends over a custom time period.
  
• I like the ability to select from a drop down some common time periods, but having it stuck to the last N days or months, I miss the ability to look at the N days since person X joined or N months since person Y left.
• I also find the line smoothing in the new view to make it too difficult to match a specific person's contributions to the main graph. This is something I also do at least once a week. The new view smooths each individual contributor and this makes the shape too different from the main graph to easily identify "ooh look this person is responsible for this blip in the main graph" or "ahh yes I remember this person was on leave around then so that's why there's this dip".

[norwd]

To be clear, I like the new look, I just want the features back 🙂

[ankitojha57]

coming podcast guest's past work and I clicked into contributors for a certain project that they supposedly founded 10+ years ago, and through long habit I had clicked and dragged to highlight the early years of the project on where the old chart used to be before realizing that my cheese was no long

[9001]

Rather than remove the zoom feature because it required mouse input, how about adding support for zooming with touch gestures in addition?

Like others have mentioned already, I did not find the previous zoom feature to be "not discoverable", quite the contrary -- it was entirely intuitive. This change has unfortunately made the contributors page far less useful for me.

[florianreuth]

I found an issue the new design has, looking at it:

Compared to the old one:

The commit count of both accounts FlorianMichael and FormallyMyles is wrong and doesn't show any activity in the graph either. The repository in question: https://github.com/ViaVersion/viaversion.com.

Beside that, I really agree with what Alex-302, sebthom and all others here said.

[heystewart]

Similar issue here. Four year project, and one day four years ago there were 120 commits for some reason by one person ... fifty developers' graphs are all meaningless since they are now scaled down by 120.

[jlong4223]

Noticing the similar issue on my end. It doesn't appear to be reflecting commit numbers after August 4th in the total commits per user.

[JuliaAya]

same here. It does not show any new activities (does not reflect the number of commits).

[flechemano]

I dont check them so much , not sure do they really work at all

[svgeesus]

Overall I like the new design. The default graph is clearer, and although the date-range axis has coarser labelling the tooltips make up for that.

Being able to select the period from a dropdown is great; I work on a repo with commits going back to 1998 (yes really, we imported the old cvs commit history) and it really helps to see who is currently active without having the graphs distorted by, say, a burst of activity 15 years ago from people who since stopped contributing.

It would be useful to be able to link to a particular view; the url remains constant regardless of which period is selected.

[svgeesus]

I can't comment on the code frequency changes because I just get "There are too many commits to generate this graph."

[jsoref]

In case the project team wants an example, here's a public one: https://github.com/powerdns/pdns/graphs/code-frequency

[MatthewRyanRead]

Same here, and I still see it even when I turn off the new view. So not only are the graphs now worse, but for the projects with lots of activity (where the graphs would be the most useful!) you can't see anything except the commit graph.

[adjkant]

A big +1 to custom range as before! FWIW I understand there's likely some limitations on BE data granularity in consideration, but I don't need it to be day granular. As at least a compromise can we have monthly granular?

The UI for selection was also great before for custom ranges. Would be great to bring that back + have it shown after as a "[month] to [month]" dual input you can select from to tune further

[ilyagr]

I find it valuable to be able to select arbitrary date ranges where the project or a particular person look more/less active. Now, it seems that the only options are "the last X months/weeks/days".

[neekon91]

We've updated two of the repo insights views - contributors and code frequency - to use an new SVG-based solution which enables improved focus navigation to support point-by-point navigation, the ability to hide a series by interacting with the chart legend, as well as the ability to view and download the data as a CSV or PNG.

Contributors

Click and drag date range selection has been replaced by a date range picker. The previous experience required mouse input and was not discoverable, while the new experience is always visible and navigable by keyboard. The current date range is more explicitly listed under the heading The contributor cards are now more responsive on small screens. The previous experience was locked to a 2 column view, where the new experience will wrap to a single column layout. Note: Contributor data is still a weekly rollup of commits.

Code frequency

The 2 different axes are now differentiated by line style, as well as color. Data points are navigable and show more detail in a tooltip, previously you could only reference against the axes visually.

👂Try Out Our New Charts and Share Your Feedback! We invite you to test our new charts and let us know how they work for you. If you have specific feedback, we’d love to hear it! Questions are encouraged too!

🤝 Share Your Experience Have you encountered any issues related to the size and variation of data specific to your repositories?

📋Help Us Prioritize Updates We are in the process of updating charts on GitHub and need your input! Which other charts would you find most valuable to update first?

If you would like to provide feedback anonymously, feel free to use this form.

Thank you for your support and feedback!

Very Cool just wanted to draw your attention to a small bug. When hovering over the graph a tooltip appears and the date is incorrect. It always says Sunday

[svgeesus]

If counts are grouped by week then it will always show the same day of the week

[KK68HK]

Om det va mig du ville ha svar ifrån så kan jag svara att det va dom jobbigaste åren i mitt liv då har jag levt ett ganska jobbigt liv .Jag har skrivit till alla möjliga på nätet om någon har svarat så har det varit spydiga svar någon har varit trevlig.och vad jag en har gjort så fungerade det inte.jag vet inte ens nu vad det igentligen handlat om.Vad jag en skulle göra så kosta det och jag har inte fått ut en enda dollar 2datorer sönder 2 paddor sönder samtidigt när jag ha varit sjuk så svar på frågan är jag tror inte att det finns någon som skulle palla så här länge.Jag hade knappt någon erfarenhet av data så kunde jag inte så bra engelska och det gick inte attgöra översättning varken på tel eller datan och ingen som jag fråga svara för dom trodde attvjag kom från en annan planet.Så att få crypton att slå i europa så blir det nog svårt men inte omöjlig.

[spacey-sooty]

Commits are inconsistent see https://github.com/wpilibsuite/allwpilib/graphs/contributors all for @spacey-sooty on this graph compared to last 12 months. Last 12 months shows an extra commit (and is the same as it was pre change)

[spacey-sooty]

Would be nice to be able to see the overview for a specific date and or date range as well.

[ibz]

Better than the previous iteration but still a downgrade from the original version. Given all the negative feedback, can we go back to what worked, please?

[ibz]

Worked for a while, but not "permanently". Unfortunately it switched back.

[jrafanie]

Yes, it looks like they shipped it for real as it's not preview anymore and the original implementation is not available.

[I-use-Arch-btw-00111]

Sorry for interruption, I'd just like to add that it'd be really useful if it was possible to check contributors/commits statistics for a specific branch. Like, there could be something like a jumplist where user could pick a branch to display statistics about.

[rbalicki2]

Would love to be able to filter by committer name. Thank you!

[pslandyl]

the change summary (++---) are missing, feeling so bad!!!

Is it possible to get this back?

[helen]

Hello - could you check to see if there's a message at the top in the repo where you noticed this that reads line counts have been omitted because commit count exceeds 10,000? That has unfortunately been the case for quite some time due to technical limitations and was not changed with this update.

[jrafanie]

@j0siepy it looks like this feature shipped as it's no longer in preview and you can't opt-out... is there a thread for discussions around it now that it's shipped?

[norwd]

Bumping for visibility, this isn't ready yet!

[koppor]

Contributors are missing. See https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/150036#discussioncomment-12337484 for examples.

[cdock1029]

This is so bad compared to the old design. Dragging those sliders from both ends very annoying compared to just drawing a box where you want it. The design of the chart area was clearer and not so harsh to look at. Please allow us to turn this off and revert to the old design. I like the old design soo much better, there's no good argument for forcing something much worse on us.

[thaJeztah]

Refreshing after selecting a range and dragging the range causes the page to be broken, and not showing contributions (also switching from "bar" presentation to "lines");

refresh_after_slide.mov

[jrafanie]

I can't recreate this one. It does look like there are a few bugs related to the delayed draw/redraw thing. Maybe this is related to that.

[thaJeztah]

Interesting; I saw it earlier Today, but initially thought it was possibly a glitch. Reproduced consistently though. I must add that I'm using Safari, so possibly browser related.

Important bit is to drag the whole range (not just one of the begin/end points), then CMD-r (reload).

[thaJeztah]

Selecting a range does not filter the "commits" view for a contributor when clicked; in the video I select a range in the past; clicking the "XXX commits" link for the contributor shows all commits, also commits outside of the given range;

filter_doesnt_filter.mov

[jrafanie]

Confirmed on my repo also. Nice bug report. I still don't know if this is where they want bug reports. Hopefully, they're seeing it.

[thaJeztah]

Loading the page shows all bars maxed out until it has loaded all data (same when changing the date-range); reload also has various "blanks"

refresh_bars.mov

[jrafanie]

Yes! There is a delay when the graphs are drawn/redrawn. Honestly, it looks like they first draw it with 0 the only label on the y-axis and redraw it with the proper scaling based on the input data.

[cdock1029]

Every time I look at the contributors page now, I'm disappointed. The choice of bar chart instead of the original area chart is a massive failure, and seems to have been chosen by a designer that doesn't use github, as well as someone who doesn't understand the basic value of area charts: a quick feel and understanding of the general trend overtime instead of over-emphasizing the comparison between discrete values of one time period to the next which is what bars are for.

It matters not at all the exact difference of one week's commit count to the next (which is what bar charts are for), but the overall visual pattern when zoomed out means so much more. Looking at these bars, maybe it's a skill issue, but I get lost in visual clutter.

Here's copilot on the value of area charts vs bars:

https://copilot.microsoft.com/shares/yMeqaoU3HtuQSywfupcXY

When deciding between an area chart and a bar chart, consider the story your data is trying to tell. Here are scenarios where an area chart is generally preferable:

Continuous or Time-Series Data:

Focus on Trends: Area charts excel at presenting how data evolves over a continuous interval—such as hours, days, months, or years—by visually emphasizing the shape of the trend.

Smooth Progression: When your goal is to show overall movement or progression (e.g., rising and falling trends), the shaded, filled area below the line can capture the viewer’s attention better than separate, static bars.

Displaying Cumulative Totals or Stacked Contributions:

Cumulative Impact: If you need to show how different components add up over time, a stacked area chart can elegantly illustrate how individual series contribute to a whole. For example, tracking both organic and paid traffic over time shows not only trends in each but also their combined total.

Visual Emphasis on Magnitude: The filled space under the curve naturally highlights the "volume" of the measure, making it easier for the audience to grasp the scale of change.

Aesthetic or Narrative Considerations:

Visual Flow and Impact: The continuous, flowing nature of an area chart can evoke a sense of movement and momentum, making it particularly suited for contexts where the overall pattern or "feel" of the data is as important as the exact numbers.

When Exact Comparisons Are Less Critical: If the exact values or differences between discrete categories are secondary to understanding the overall trend or aggregate movement, an area chart can communicate the big picture more effectively.

In summary, opt for an area chart when your aim is to illustrate how values flow over time or contribute cumulatively—especially when a continuous trend is central to your narrative. If the focus shifts to comparing distinct categories with clear boundaries, a bar chart might be the better choice.

Look at the old way, you quickly feel the trend. It just pops out.

Compare that to this mess. Can anyone explain why bars were chosen to replace area? I don't see the justification.

And of course on top of this, just drawing a box on the chart directly was the best UI for selecting time windows.
The sliders now are strictly worse.

[jrafanie]

Ultimately, the redesign was for UX purposes including keyboard navigation and point to point navigation. My conclusion is they traded UX for one use case at the cost of other use cases that a lot of people used. I no longer use the page because the experience is far worse for all of the reasons I and many others have reported here.

Others have already shown the bugs that remain such as the "draw/redraw delay" on load/reload or that the contributor commits link when zoomed into a date range doesn't filter commits by the current date range. I'm sure there are others beyond the usability problems stated above with their design decisions.

Yes, there has been useless feedback here but there has been very good feedback. The lack of communication on the whole thing is disappointing. Who knows if they're even watching the feedback now that the preview feature is default and we can't go back to the prior version that many of us prefer.