feat: Add group stats sunburst plots to active WG page

[larseggert]

No description provided.

[rjsparks]

Are you sure you want the charts directly on the /wg page vs on their own, one-click away?
I'm wondering if they would inconvenience people using the page to navigate.
If we think the only use of the page is discovery/browsing, then having them on page makes sense.

[larseggert]

In which way would the inconvenience? Because the layout jumps?

Am also wondering if we should put one of them onto the main landing page and make the sunburst sectors links to the WG pages...

[rjsparks]

I think you've been staring at these so long as part of the IESG conversation that you're giving them too much focus.

It's a lot to ask of a newcomer to understand what the sunbursts are trying to say and to guess at how the metrics they are showing should be important to them.

It's a big cognitive shift to have to wrap past a bunch of stats to get to a list of things. We cram way to much on many pages.

If the main page should be stats or something that starts to explain what's going on, then sure - we should take away the search there and move search to a different page. But the result shouldn't focus on just working groups. RGs, AGs, Programs, etc...

Consider the group about page - what you're proposing here is analagous to moving the document relationship diagram to being on the about page, not one click away from it.

[larseggert]

Consider the group about page - what you're proposing here is analagous to moving the document relationship diagram to being on the about page, not one click away from it.

Thanks, that's a good suggestion. See #5137.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #5126 (94ad09c) into main (f9c2376) will decrease coverage by 0.02%.
The diff coverage is 89.38%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #5126      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   88.54%   88.53%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         295      295              
  Lines       40046    40089      +43     
==========================================
+ Hits        35458    35492      +34     
- Misses       4588     4597       +9     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
ietf/doc/urls.py	100.00% <ø> (ø)
ietf/doc/views_doc.py	91.53% <ø> (+0.15%)	⬆️
ietf/group/urls.py	100.00% <ø> (ø)
ietf/meeting/views.py	90.85% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️
ietf/secr/sreq/forms.py	97.32% <77.77%> (-0.99%)	⬇️
ietf/api/views.py	89.44% <89.55%> (-0.03%)	⬇️
ietf/group/views.py	90.83% <90.32%> (-0.02%)	⬇️
ietf/api/urls.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
ietf/doc/views_search.py	88.84% <100.00%> (-0.40%)	⬇️
ietf/sync/discrepancies.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
... and 2 more

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

[rjsparks]

Thanks, that's a good suggestion. See #5137.

Well, it wasn't what I was suggesting, but ok. What I was trying to point to was how we already treat the document dependency graphs as a "one click away" thing:

[larseggert]

Ah! I can totally make it modals, esp. on the area page.