Skip to content

chore: switch from gtag to plausible - #6680

Merged
jeluard merged 1 commit into
ChainSafe:unstablefrom
jeluard:jeluard/docusaurus-plausible
Apr 19, 2024
Merged

chore: switch from gtag to plausible#6680
jeluard merged 1 commit into
ChainSafe:unstablefrom
jeluard:jeluard/docusaurus-plausible

Conversation

@jeluard

@jeluard jeluard commented Apr 18, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Motivation

Use chainsafe analytics platform

@jeluard
jeluard requested a review from a team as a code owner April 18, 2024 07:55
@codecov

codecov Bot commented Apr 18, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

Merging #6680 (53177ac) into unstable (ae984f0) will decrease coverage by 0.02%.
Report is 6 commits behind head on unstable.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##           unstable    #6680      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     61.81%   61.80%   -0.02%     
============================================
  Files           556      556              
  Lines         59050    59103      +53     
  Branches       1898     1898              
============================================
+ Hits          36502    36526      +24     
- Misses        22505    22534      +29     
  Partials         43       43              

@nflaig

nflaig commented Apr 18, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Use chainsafe analytics platform

By that you mean this is from chainsafe, or something others within chainsafe use already?

And who is managing this?

@jeluard

jeluard commented Apr 18, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@nflaig Right, this is the go to chainsafe analytics platform. It's a SaaS AFAIK

@nflaig

nflaig commented Apr 19, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@nflaig Right, this is the go to chainsafe analytics platform. It's a SaaS AFAIK

can you please add more context to the PR, and was there any discussion on this?

@jeluard

jeluard commented Apr 19, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@nflaig This is a request from ChainSafe marketing

@nflaig nflaig left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Let's get this in for next release so we don't use two different analytic platforms. And make sure to highlight it in release notes, as part of docs migration.

@jeluard
jeluard merged commit c0e2bf4 into ChainSafe:unstable Apr 19, 2024
@jeluard jeluard added scope-documentation All issues related to the Lodestar documentation. meta-pm Issues relating to Project Management tasks. labels Apr 19, 2024
@jeluard jeluard added this to the v1.18.0 milestone Apr 19, 2024
@philknows

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Will add additional context to this. Generally we should refrain from using overly excessive analytics trackers in our software at ChainSafe especially if it鈥檚 capturing data that we otherwise wouldn鈥檛 need to achieve our goals.

Using some sort of tracker is useful to enhance our documentation to better understand how people navigate our docs and how to improve it. Alongside with understanding our reach as an indication of potential usage outside of staking metrics. #6549 was a stop-gap measure (because it was free and we anticipated v1.18 to be released much earlier) until marketing gave us some sort of direction on what they were using.

It made sense to use a less intrusive platform and align with what marketing uses for other projects at ChainSafe. This PR aligns with the goal of being less intrusive and using common tools between ChainSafe projects.

@wemeetagain

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

馃帀 This PR is included in v1.18.0 馃帀

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

meta-pm Issues relating to Project Management tasks. scope-documentation All issues related to the Lodestar documentation.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants