Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] Recruitment (Reviewers, Testers, Maintainers, Hobbyists)

[Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>]

On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 01:24:07PM -0700, Guenter wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 06:58:00PM +0000, Jason Cooper wrote:
> > > Agreed. On the other side, is gaming really a problem with kernel code
> > > reviews ? Sure, a search engine provider will have to look out for
> > > abuse patterns, but for code reviews I am not sure if it is worth the
> > > effort. I would suspect that it is much more likely that the simple
> > > "wc -w" approach should provide you with worthy candidates for the KS.
> > > Since you are not dealing with hundreds or thousands of candidates,
> > > I'd assume you'll do a hand screening anyway, and quickly identify any
> > > gamers. I'd be quite surprised if there are any, though.
> > 
> > I've personally seen it, and I don't think I'm alone.  It seems to follow
> > a pattern of:
> > 
> >  - Manager/HR thinks counting tags is a useful metric (#!@$ laziness).
> >  - tag-count becomes an evaluation item.
> >  - Pay raises are affected.
> >  - patch submitters do the obvious.
> >  - maintainers weep and die a little inside.
> > 
> Sigh :-(. Guess I never had the pleasure of working for any of those
> companies, and the areas of the kernel I care about may be too obscure
> to get much attention by the gamers.
> 
> > The easy ones to spot are multiple-S-o-bs.  I've actually been told "No,
> > he didn't write any code, I was just trying to help him out."
> > 
> Multiple S-o-b's don't always mean gaming, though. 

Agreed, if two people edited a patch, or there's one person approved to
cleanup/email LKML, etc.  Then multiple-SoB makes sense wrt DCO.  My
wording could have been better.  I had a specific incident in mind, but
that doesn't make a rule.

thx,

Jason.