From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC37F305 for ; Sat, 11 Jul 2015 01:04:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pmta2.delivery3.ore.mailhop.org (pmta2.delivery3.ore.mailhop.org [54.213.22.21]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2BBE120B for ; Sat, 11 Jul 2015 01:04:08 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2015 01:04:04 +0000 From: Jason Cooper To: Guenter Message-ID: <20150711010404.GX23515@io.lakedaemon.net> References: <1436414798.23558.3.camel@ellerman.id.au> <559EBD4C.6030502@gmail.com> <20150709190640.GC788@roeck-us.net> <20150709194734.GG9169@vmdeb7> <20150709201315.GF9417@thunk.org> <20150709205049.GB5154@roeck-us.net> <20150709214718.GG9417@thunk.org> <20150710182045.GA19854@roeck-us.net> <20150710185800.GW23515@io.lakedaemon.net> <20150710202407.GC9469@groeck-UX31A> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150710202407.GC9469@groeck-UX31A> Cc: James Bottomley , ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org, jic23@jic23.retrosnub.co.uk Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] Recruitment (Reviewers, Testers, Maintainers, Hobbyists) List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , 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.