[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Package Review Stats for 2008

On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 12:49:36 -0500, Paul wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 02, 2009 at 06:31:26PM +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> > I don't know if it was what Michael wanted to say, but there are reviews
> > that are very easy and reviews that are quite hard, counting these the
> > same may be misleading. However taking that into account requires a 
> > rating of the submission which is not obvious. 
> > 
> > Another issue is that in some cases commentators may do more work
> > in the review than the one approving the review request. This is also
> > not something that is easily measured, though...
> > 
> > In any case, as long as those numbers are not misrepresented as 
> > the amount of work done through reviews or the like, but only plainly 
> > as review requests accepted, everything is fine.
> Precisely.  This is not about rewarding people for the most work done,
> simply for a number of package reviews.  One very detailed package
> review might be a lot of work for an experienced package reviewer.
> Similarly, one simple package review might just as easily be a lot of
> work for an enthusiastic but inexperienced package reviewer.  Both may
> be completed equally successfully.
> I don't see a way of equitably treating the amount of work done, and
> therefore this reward is not based on that measurement.  And the fact
> that amounts of work may differ should not stop us from saying thank
> you to contributors doing work.

Which is what Brian's OP has done. It has listed _all_ the people who've
contributed package reviews in 2008, sorted by number of reviews. Why is
that not enough? Why do you want to apply a system where the two reviewers
from your example above won't see any official "thank you"?

> I think concerns of people gaming the system are completely out of
> proportion on a risk vs. reward basis.

Still: somebody, who [unintentionally] hunts down dozens of tiny Perl
module packages, would enter the Top 10 more likely [and possibly
unintentionally] than somebody who fights a 20K spec file for a pkg
that requires lots of work.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]