On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 08:20:45AM -0700, Marc MERLIN wrote:
> > There are lots of contributors with the same small amout of patches
> > contributed and are not listed there.  This is first time I hear about
> > Netgear being a contributor and it looks strange to see that name among
> > the major contributors.
> > 
> > If there's demand to list all the minor contributors, then let's add a
> > separate section, otherwise I'm going to remove the entry.
> 
> That said, my goal was not to say which company gave the most
> contributions and try and rank them.
> Honestly, right now any company that is using btrfs and contributing to
> it is a great thing in my book.
> I'm not even a fan of counting number of lines or frequency of patches.
> How do you compare someone sending easy cleanup patches vs someone who
> spent a month tracking down a file corruption problem no one could find
> nor fix, and sends a 3 line patch to fix it in the end?

Patch count itself as a metric does not work, I'm roughly calculating
amount of work spent on contribution in the area of patches, testing,
bugreporting, documentation, community support. For all the companies
listed there is a clear record of these activies, that's what they get
the credit for.

The non-company/community deserve the entry on itself, but I was not
discussing community contributions.

I really like to see random people sending patches and I try to help
them to get patches merged by doing reviews or commenting.

> How about we leave that decision with Chris Mason?

He's been CCed for that purpose and made a statement which I don't
have a slightest problem to agree with:

> I'd be happy to see people add themselves to a "we're contributors"
> section if they have been part of progs or kernel releases for a year.
> Code review, patch submission, and helping users on the list/irc all count.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to