Back to all discussions

  •   3 months ago

Is the review/judging team's site visible in your installations at developer console? example: https://developer.atlassian.com/console/{{appid}}/monitoring/installations

Hi everyone,

I am currently monitoring my app's review status and had a question about what we should be seeing at .

Specifically, in the Monitor > Installations section, I’m trying to confirm if the review or judging team’s test site appears once they start evaluating the app. Since they need to install the app to test it, it logically should show up in our "Current installations" list.

For those of you also in the judging phase:

Do you see any new, unfamiliar site URLs listed at that might belong to Atlassian?

Has your "Installations" count increased or shown activity from a site you don't recognize?

I’m curious if checking this link is a reliable way to know that the judging has officially started.

Thanks for any insights you can share!

  • 8 comments

  •   •   3 months ago

    Hello,
    When someone is reviewing the app, the installation is visible. Based on previous Codegeists' experience, it is completed in stages.

    During the first phase, projects are chosen from the list. During the second phase, the projects are put in place and judged. Someone is installing the app and checking the functionality.

    The project will not move on to the second phase if the first phase is unsuccessful. That means the project is no longer considered in the competition.

    I could see how testing that many projects would be hard, so I think this is the best way to go about the judging process. However, this is how I picture the process. It might look different.

    Best regards

  •   •   3 months ago

    Hi Damian,

    Thanks for your cooperation and support.

    Regarding the points you mentioned, I noticed that the official rules don't actually specify those details about the installation stages. Under "6. Judges & Criteria," the rules state the following:

    6. Judges & Criteria
    Eligible Submissions will be evaluated by a panel of judges selected by the Sponsor (the “Judges”). Judges may be employees of the Sponsor or third parties, may or may not be listed individually on the Hackathon Website, and may change before or during the Judging Period. Judging may take place in one or more rounds with one or more panels of Judges, at the discretion of the Sponsor.

    Stage One
    The first stage will determine via pass/fail whether the ideas meet a baseline level of viability, in that the Project reasonably fits the theme and reasonably applies the required APIs/SDKs featured in the Hackathon.

    Stage Two
    All Submissions that pass Stage One will be evaluated in Stage Two based on the following equally weighted criteria (the “Judging Criteria”) and according to the sole and absolute discretion of the Judges:

    As you can see, there isn't much clarity here. Your assumption might be correct, but it could also be different. I believe there should be more transparency regarding this process.

    If we assume that those who don't see an installation are already eliminated, it would be much better if they informed the participants who didn't pass Stage One rather than making them wait. Of course, since we don't know for sure if they are skipping the installation or not, it's hard to tell. I’d hate to think that projects without an installation are simply considered "not worth testing" :D.

    Hopefully, they will inform everyone on this soon. Thanks again for your support!

    Best regards,

  •   •   3 months ago

    We have the same feeling.

    In our Developer Console we do not see any installations from the judging team’s site. It also does not look like the app was actually tried. Our YouTube demo video has no new views either.

    It gives the impression that the judging team may have been overwhelmed by the large number of submissions and may not have had enough capacity to properly review every participant.

    We respect the effort behind the event. We just want to understand whether our app was actually evaluated in practice.

  •   •   3 months ago

    Hi Nick,

    First of all, I want to congratulate all the winners and mention that I have great respect for every project submitted here. My priority is not to promote my own work or to put my project ahead of others. However, I completely agree with your observation.

    It is very clear that many projects, including ours, were never downloaded, and even the YouTube analytics show no new views. Like you, my Developer Console shows zero installations. I contacted the Hackathon Manager, Janet, about this, and her response was quite disappointing. She stated:

    "Per the hackathon rules, 'Judges are not required to test the Project and may choose to judge based solely on the text description, images, and video provided in the Submission.'"

    This basically confirms that they didn't even try the apps. I told her that this is unfair, especially for corporate solutions that require technical depth. A 5-minute video or a short text is not enough to evaluate a real, working software product.

    It’s sad to see that after weeks of hard work, some projects weren't even "deigned" to be installed or watched. I asked for my feedback to be forwarded to the judges, but I am still waiting for a real, detailed explanation. We all deserve a professional evaluation process that respects the effort we put in.

    Thanks,
    Regards,

  •   •   3 months ago

    Haha, I totally agree with you! That part about the "garbage project" is pure gold and exactly how I feel right now :D
    Honestly, if I had known this earlier, I would have spent my weeks making a Hollywood-style trailer and some fancy Photoshop images instead of actually coding. I spent so much time fighting with technical bugs and complex functions, but apparently, I was just fighting with ghosts since nobody even bothered to install the app!
    It’s funny (and a bit sad) to realize that a beautiful PowerPoint might have been more "competitive" than a fully functional corporate solution. Lesson learned for next time: More filters, less functions!
    Cheers to our "invisible" hard work! :)

    Thanks,
    Regards,

  • Private user

    Private user   •   3 months ago

    Hi,

    Regarding the installation, it did not appear in my developer console. However, I believe the judges did test my app. Since I used the OpenAI API, I monitored usage during the judging period and noticed three prompt requests, which indicates that the application was accessed.

    As for the YouTube views, if the video was watched through the embedded player on Devpost, it would not increase the public view count.

    I also believe that the judging criteria could benefit from greater transparency. Many participants invest significant time and effort into their projects, and clearer evaluation standards would help everyone better understand the results.

    I reviewed your project and it is one of the strongest submissions.

    From my previous hackathon experiences, I learned that even if you build an enterprise-level project with strong potential value, it can still be beaten by a much simpler idea. This was not necessarily the case in this year’s Codegeist, but I have observed this pattern in other hackathons such as Bolt and Kiroween.

    My advice for future hackathons would be this: when building a project, either focus on creating something with real-world value beyond the competition, or strategically invest in delivering an outstanding demo presentation. In many cases, a simple idea presented in a highly polished and compelling way can significantly increase the chances of winning.

  •   •   3 months ago

    Hi everyone,

    I am Lindsay from Atlassian, part of the Codegeist 2025 team.

    After carefully reading this thread and the comments on Devpost, we want to share more information and additional transparency. Apologies for the delay — I tried posting last week but ran into character limits, so I’m sharing this in two parts.

    First off, thank you to everyone who participated in the Hackathon, built an app, and shared it with us. We know many of you put significant effort into learning Forge, identifying a use case, and building a solution, and we want to recognize that work and acknowledge all your submissions. We hear your frustration about judging visibility, and we’re sorry that parts of this experience felt opaque and discouraging. Our judges were given the tough responsibility of choosing the winning submissions from a highly competitive field.

    In the spirit of openness, here’s what we’ll cover: 1) Judging and winner submissions 2) Why some teams saw no installs or video views 3) How to get support on your submission going forward

    1. Where we stand on judging and winners

    As in previous years, experienced Atlassian staff and Devpost partners vetted submissions and made decisions with care and rigor. We follow a structured judging process, and a winning app must pass four rounds, from eligibility screening, to written and video submission review, to technical, to final judging.

    We believe the results and judging process were consistent with the published criteria and past Codegeists. Winners earned their place under the published criteria and our historical process. At the same time, we know that not every strong app can win, and some of you may feel your work wasn’t fully seen or appreciated. We’re listening to this feedback and will use it to inform how we think about future Codegeist events and how we recognize participation.

  •   •   3 months ago

    Part II:

    2. About installs, views, and missing review signals

    We understand that seeing no installs in your Developer Console or no new YouTube views can feel like your app was never even seen.

    We want to assure you that every submission was reviewed by a human.

    After submissions pass eligibility requirements, they are judged based on the write-up and the video submission. The judges evaluate the app use case and the proposed solution as well as the polish, creativity, and completeness of the content provided.

    Submissions that pass these first rounds are then sent to another set of judges for a technical review, where the app is installed and tested.

    I want to address questions about whether that means the video and write up are more important than the app itself. That isn’t the case. In order to win, a project must have both: an outstanding content submission as well as an outstanding app.

    3. How to get support on your submission going forward

    Even if your project didn’t advance or win, the work you did still matters and has real value. You stretched your craft, learned something new, and built a solution that could help others. A meaningful next step is sharing your app with real users — whether that’s inside your own team or by listing it on the Atlassian Marketplace — so it can live beyond a single hackathon.

    If you’d like feedback or want ideas on how to evolve your project, we encourage you to engage with other builders in our developer community (for example, on CDAC or at ace.atlassian.com). Many experienced Marketplace partners and community members are happy to share what’s worked for them and offer constructive perspectives.

    Looking ahead, we’re committed to boosting promotion of information about our judging stages and criteria in future Codegeist events, so participants can better plan their submissions. We’re also exploring more ways to recognize strong work beyond the main prizes, such as highlighting additional projects or sharing best-practice examples.

    We welcome criticism and feedback on how to improve Codegeist. We do, however, ask that comments stay focused on ideas and processes rather than on individual Atlassian or Devpost team members. To protect everyone involved, we’ve removed a small number of comments that crossed that line.

    This post is our primary response on this topic; we don’t plan to continue a back-and-forth discussion in the thread. Thank you again to everyone who participated in Codegeist 2025 and for caring enough to share your perspectives.

    Thank you again,

    Lindsay

Comments are closed.