6

Over the last several months I've seen a trend in flag-reasons. Several of you are of the opinion that our #4 migration target should not be Webmasters, but either Unix & Linux or DBA. This is somewhat born up by the facts, but unfortunately, it isn't stable.

Our #3 migration target after SuperUser and StackOverflow has varied between DBA, U&L, and for a week it was Apple. WebMasters has not been #3 for quite some time. All of these require a mod to handle the migration, so having these as the #3 target is significant. Clearly Webmasters shouldn't be our #3, but it isn't clear what should be.

Could someone with better SQL skills than I have hit up data.stackexchange.com and dredge up some migration stats? Preferably broken down by month, so we can see how things are trending? Such an analysis will demonstrate what our #4 target should be, and whether or not we should push for a hard-to-get 5th migration target.

Key dates:

  • DBA left beta in September
  • Unix & Linux left beta a year ago

When a site is in beta it is strongly discouraged by the StackExchange community to migrate content to them from the production sites like ours, so when a site leaves beta should be indicated by a large uptick in migration traffic.

  • 3
    Is it really impossible to convince the powers-that-be that we should have more than 4 migration targets? All of the content fracturing that Area51 has caused, coupled with SF being an original trilogy site, means that we would probably have good use for 5 or 6 migration targets, where bicycles, drupal, or english likely wouldn't need more than 1 or 2 targets. It seems like limiting everyone to 4 targets is forcing many differently shaped pegs into the same hole by limiting us to 4 targets. That said, I know m.so is the right place to post this, but I don't feel like being bludgeoned today. – MDMarra Jan 11 '12 at 15:47
  • Yes, it really is impossible to have more than 4. Jeff has been rather firm that there shall never be more than 5 migration targets, and one of those targets shall always be the site meta. We've had several attempts to add a 4th target to SF's list and they've always failed. – sysadmin1138 Jan 11 '12 at 15:54
  • 2
    Given the paucity of migrations to our meta from the main site it's mildly irritating that we effectively have an unused/unusable slot. – Iain Jan 11 '12 at 15:59
  • 2
    @sysadmin1138 I'm authoring a post detailing why SF and possibly SU are unique in the network because of Area51 overlap. Wish me luck. – MDMarra Jan 11 '12 at 16:02
  • @MDMarra Good luck getting lynched. Iain, I honestly agree meta migrations should be restricted to 10k/750fw/mods because of the rare nature of it. sysadmin1138 what are Jeff's reasons for these restrictions? – Tablemaker Jan 11 '12 at 16:06
  • @TylerShads As I recall, UI for the most part. Any list more than 5 items long is Too Long. That's why there are 5 close reasons, 5 off-topic reasons (if you include the simple OffTopic), 5 list-items in each block on your profile, and why most summary screens cut of at 5 or less. Some mod-only menus have 6 items, otherwise they really like 5-or-less lists. – sysadmin1138 Jan 11 '12 at 16:10
  • If @MDMarra is getting lynched at least I'll be there to keep him company :-) – voretaq7 Jan 12 '12 at 5:42
5

It doesn't look like the information about posts being migrated (PostHistory.PostHistoryType=17) is stored in the data dump. The best data we have is is in the migrations section of the 10k tools

In the last 90 days

SU        323
SO         77 
U&L        44
DBA        33
Apple      32
Webmasters 27
AskUbuntu  20
Security   17
mSF         1

Others     12 to 6 different sites

-- Edit Zypher --
All time data from a "magical source"

superuser.com                   2943
stackoverflow.com               2799
webmasters.stackexchange.com    238
unix.stackexchange.com          140
dba.stackexchange.com           80
askubuntu.com                   76
apple.stackexchange.com         69
security.stackexchange.com      51
meta.serverfault.com            34
webapps.stackexchange.com       25
  • Amortizing over their post-beta periods, we're definitely sending more to dba than U&L these days. – sysadmin1138 Jan 11 '12 at 22:56
  • 1
    @sysadmin1138 agreed - the fact that DBA has managed to climb to #5 in less than 6 months pretty much earns it a home in the migration box (until we come up with a better migration box) – voretaq7 Jan 12 '12 at 5:44
  • @sysadmin1138 Agreed, it's rare that I migrate to any site, other than DBA and U&L (and obviously SU and SO) – Sam Cogan Jan 12 '12 at 14:00
  • @Sam Well, in that case I'll kick off the process to see if we can get the migration-paths changed. Stay Tuned! Don't Touch That Dial! – sysadmin1138 Jan 12 '12 at 14:24

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .