+1 from me also,
I also use +0 for question asking and the like, because IMHO that's not
what -1 are for. As for myself losing stackalytics stats when *I* do
this (ie using +0 instead of -1), meh, I got better things in my life to
think/care about :-P
-Josh
Nikhil Komawar wrote:
Thanks Amrith!
I am a big supporter on including +0s.
On 4/9/16 6:31 PM, Amrith Kumar wrote:
Thanks to Dims and Steve for bringing this up.
It has long been my opinion that +0's are invaluable for the question
asking, and for getting to understand software, and unfortunately +0's are lost
in the noise. So a while ago, I posted to the ML [1] asking about making +0's
more visible. I signed up to submit a request on gerrit upstream (and promptly
forgot to do that). This mail thread has reminded me of that. I have now posted
a request for the upstream gerrit folks to fix [2].
I believe that people don't use +0's enough because they often get
ignored. I know that one can be cynical and say it is because it gives one no
credit in stackalytics; I choose not to be that person.
I post +0's a lot. But, I find that they are often ignored. If you
agree with me that +0's are useful, and could be highlighted better in the
gerrit review screen, please post a comment on [2].
Thanks,
-amrith
[1] http://openstack.markmail.org/thread/nj4onttaibjmfxew
[2] https://code.google.com/p/gerrit/issues/detail?id=4050
-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Riedemann [mailto:mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 09, 2016 9:43 AM
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics
stats
On 4/8/2016 5:54 PM, Jay Faulkner wrote:
I know a lot of folks explicitly avoid a +0 vote with a comment
because you don't get "credit" for it in statistics. Whether or not
that should matter is another discussion, but there is a significant
disincentive to no-voting right now.
-
Jay Faulkner
----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
*From:* Dolph Mathews<dolph.math...@gmail.com>
*Sent:* Friday, April 8, 2016 1:54 PM
*To:* OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
*Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the
Stackalytics stats
On Friday, April 8, 2016, John Dickinson<m...@not.mn
<mailto:m...@not.mn>>
wrote:
On 8 Apr 2016, at 13:35, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> On 2016-04-08 19:42:18 +0200 (+0200), Dmitry Tantsur wrote:
>> There are many ways to game a simple +1 counter, such as +1'ing
changes
>> that already have at least 1x +2, or which already approved, or
which need
>> rechecking...
> [...]
>
> The behavior which baffles me, and also seems to be on the rise
> lately, is random +1 votes on changes whose commit messages
and/or
> status clearly indicate they should not merged and do not need to
be
> reviewed. I suppose that's another an easy way to avoid the
dreaded
> "disagreements" counter?
> --
> Jeremy Stanley
I have been told that some OpenStack on boarding teaches new members
of the community to do reviews. And they say, effectively, "muddle
through as you can. You won't understand it all at first, but do
your best. When you're done, add a +1 and move to the next one"
I advocate for basically this, but instead of a +1, leave a +0 and ask
questions. The new reviewer will inevitably learn something and the
author will benefit by explaining their change (teaching is the best
way to learn).
I've been working to correct this when I've seen it, but +1 reviews
with no comments might not be people trying to game. It might simply
be people trying to get involved that don't know any better yet.
--John
______________________________________________________________________
____ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
There is also disincentive in +1ing a change that you don't understand and
is wrong and then a core comes along and -1s it (you get dinged for the
disagreement). And there is disincentive in -1ing a change for the wrong
reasons (silly nits or asking questions for understanding). I ask a lot of
questions in a lot of changes and I don't vote on those because it would
be inappropriate.
I also notice when "newcomers" are asking good questions for understanding
and not voting on them, it shows me they are trying to learn and are
getting invested in the project, not just trying to pad stats. Those are
the people we look to mentor into bigger roles in the project team, be
that working on subteams or eventually looking at for the core reviewer
team.
--
Thanks,
Matt Riedemann
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
