Re: [Ksummit-2012-discuss] [ATTEND or not ATTEND] That's the question!

["Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

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 <richardcochran@gmail.com>
>    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!

Regards,
Srivatsa S. Bhat