From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Ray Lee" Subject: Re: Reporting bugs and bisection Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 12:35:12 -0700 Message-ID: <2c0942db0804171235o49238b99u6cdbd3e5c8d6ebb7@mail.gmail.com> References: <47FEADCB.7070104@rtr.ca> <9a8748490804161417n4ad6c1den54ccd302831a66c6@mail.gmail.com> <48078323.4010109@davidnewall.com> <200804172109.35027.rjw@sisk.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "David Newall" , "Jesper Juhl" , sverre@rabbelier.nl, git@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel , "James Morris" , "Al Viro" , "Andrew Morton" , "Willy Tarreau" , david@lang.hm, "Stephen Clark" , "Evgeniy Polyakov" , "Tilman Schmidt" , Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, "Mark Lord" , "David Miller" , yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org, jeff@garzik.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" X-From: linux-kernel-owner+glk-linux-kernel-3=40m.gmane.org-S1753856AbYDQTff@vger.kernel.org Thu Apr 17 21:59:04 2008 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: glk-linux-kernel-3@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JmZuA-0001oC-UG for glk-linux-kernel-3@gmane.org; Thu, 17 Apr 2008 21:36:23 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753856AbYDQTff (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:35:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750952AbYDQTfQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:35:16 -0400 Received: from rv-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.198.240]:35321 "EHLO rv-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750976AbYDQTfN (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:35:13 -0400 Received: by rv-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id k29so105195rvb.1 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 2008 12:35:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; bh=D9lz66zWOZh5xj0ZygLKv8ZG+Rd0A/d3oot6Z8yfYyA=; b=Gb1z3HyC0Ffk+7h4am4Z3G4QAd3D4+JDpMc14LwUWxdbbCgV9MbW2DpJsXf+YkidhQM81wh/hJh3i0rjG4ZhxosX35+VihMzXyzBdljwZ7jDkKJknoTkN1qxALpY2NXzQoKO+MB1zWEnKQIIM7T2haHpxFlCY6X9/Ui+91SZksQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=oyLY7o7c8q+uPNWD6rVvOSgUFKoHdMWHBVsQu3ZzMWoAVthUPmVO/0dvInBf5vUTwmM0jx7W8Cv2qD1ZqmBD/TFje7oCpkB9n5kq8b7Bj5ZN7TpYH6IEBKMSWXfpCeoYE4LywWimsd+qpdEyhgYa7u7kNaM+iJTaAaysUiK542k= Received: by 10.140.249.20 with SMTP id w20mr1067819rvh.21.1208460912584; Thu, 17 Apr 2008 12:35:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.141.4.16 with HTTP; Thu, 17 Apr 2008 12:35:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <200804172109.35027.rjw@sisk.pl> Content-Disposition: inline X-Google-Sender-Auth: 66781d05dec3790c Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 12:09 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > Finger-pointing, in these extreme cases, gives incentive to improve > > quality. It's a positive thing. > > Sorry, but I have to disagree. Negative finger-pointing is never a good thing. Correct, but let's be careful here. The original suggestion was, effectively, to get better metrics on the quality of contributions. Those metrics *could* be used for finger pointing, or (my preference) they could be used to direct and allocate our scarce resources: code reviews and mentoring. There's no way to know what the metrics will tell us until we have them. Arguing against metrics because they *may* be used to point fingers at people is a silly argument; anything can be subverted to do that. Let's get some measurements and see what they say. In the meantime, try to believe that they could be put to good purposes, such as identifying code areas that are tricky for contributors to get right (independent of contributor), or contributors that could benefit from code reviews, etc.