From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964861Ab2GFKqH (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Jul 2012 06:46:07 -0400 Received: from mx2.parallels.com ([64.131.90.16]:59541 "EHLO mx2.parallels.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933034Ab2GFKqE (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Jul 2012 06:46:04 -0400 Message-ID: <4FF6C148.7030402@parallels.com> Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 14:43:20 +0400 From: Glauber Costa User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120615 Thunderbird/13.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" CC: Richard Cochran , Frederic Weisbecker , "J. Bruce Fields" , Jonathan Corbet , , LKML Subject: Re: [Ksummit-2012-discuss] [ATTEND or not ATTEND] That's the question! References: <20120615233413.GB8894@kroah.com> <20120616072906.7469ec24@tpl.lwn.net> <20120620195121.GA1719@fieldses.org> <4FF6B32A.7070006@parallels.com> <20120706095450.GB7728@somewhere.redhat.com> <20120706101149.GA26028@localhost.localdomain> <4FF6BFC7.9060405@linux.vnet.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <4FF6BFC7.9060405@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 07/06/2012 02:36 PM, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote: > On 07/06/2012 03:41 PM, Richard Cochran wrote: >> On Fri, Jul 06, 2012 at 11:54:52AM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: >>> On Fri, Jul 06, 2012 at 01:43:06PM +0400, Glauber Costa wrote: >>>> The same way we have checkpatch, we can have something automated that >>>> will attempt to rule out some trivial patches in the counting process. >>>> We can scan a patch, and easily determine if each part of it is: >>>> >>>> * pure whitespace >>>> * pure Documentation change >>>> * comment fix >>>> >>>> And if a patch is 100 % comprised by those, we simply don't count it. >>>> People that just want to increase their numbers - they will always >>>> exist, will tend to stop doing that. Simply because doing it will not >>>> help them at all. >>> >>> OTOH, documentation changes or comment fixes, and even sometimes pure whitespace >>> fixes, can be very valuable contributions. This can be a useful and ungrateful >>> work and that deserve credit. >>> >>> We just can't find an automated and right way to evaluate a contribution. >> >> Well what about submitters and maintainers labeling patches below the >> SOB with tags like the following? >> >> Signed-off-by: Richard Cochran >> Tags: docu whitespace trivial >> >> Part of the review would be making sure the labels fit. >> > > Please no! > I don't see why we should clutter the changelog with tags for reasons as > unimportant as measuring some patch's value! > Stronger: Having the maintainer to do more work is hardly a way to decrease the amount of work he does. (Well, it could be in some cases, but not in this)