Fix lifecycle contributor state accounting and add extra QA for sqlmesh metrics pipeline

[kenyiu]

FIx this: #2186 (comment)

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project	Deployment	Preview	Comments	Updated (UTC)
kariba-network	Ready	Preview	Comment	Nov 18, 2025 3:57pm
oso-www	Ready	Preview	Comment	Nov 18, 2025 3:57pm

[ccerv1]

What's the difference between a "first time" contributor and a "new" contributor?

I believe we already have "new" contributors working, right?

[kenyiu]

For the logic of new contributor now, its relying on the author_association provided by github. There are a few issues for using it:

1. It will be removed: https://github.blog/changelog/2025-08-08-upcoming-changes-to-github-events-api-payloads/#whats-changing
2. The logic now is only considering first pr as new contributor, which seems not fitting our updated scenarios

Then, i used the label name proposed in your table without rewriting the new_contributor one, but we can definitely update the one.

[kenyiu]

@ccerv1 for now, the metrics contributor_activity_classification is updated and providing the following count monthly/yearly:

first_time_contributor
churned_after_first_time_contributor
new_part_time_contributor
new_full_time_contributor
churned_after_part_time_contributor
active_part_time_contributor
part_time_to_full_time_contributor
churned_after_full_time_contributor
active_full_time_contributor
full_time_to_part_time_contributor
reactivated_part_time_contributor
reactivated_full_time_contributor

is it enough for the scope of work?

Also, in such case, should I update the existing lifecycle metrics to include all the changes in number of the type of contributors? Btw, the word lifecycle is a bit confusing with the new classifications and scope of work. maybe we should rename it as well.

[ccerv1]

Hi @kenyiu
Many thanks for this! Excited to see what the results look like.
FYI, I created a small test version last week. It's in this model: int_pln_developer_lifecycle_monthly

I've approved your PR and we can merge it and see what results we get. Ideally we can diff them against some of the projects included in my test version and see if we get similar numbers.

Feel free to merge if you feel it's ready to go. (It ran locally and passed CI as well.)

[kenyiu]

@ccerv1 thanks. let's merge it first, and we can check how it goes before modifying the lifecycle sql for the changes in number of different classifications of contributors.