From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933115Ab2GFKiD (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Jul 2012 06:38:03 -0400 Received: from e28smtp06.in.ibm.com ([122.248.162.6]:46535 "EHLO e28smtp06.in.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932928Ab2GFKiA (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Jul 2012 06:38:00 -0400 Message-ID: <4FF6BFC7.9060405@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 16:06:55 +0530 From: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120605 Thunderbird/13.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Richard Cochran CC: Frederic Weisbecker , Glauber Costa , "J. Bruce Fields" , Jonathan Corbet , ksummit-2012-discuss@lists.linux-foundation.org, 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> In-Reply-To: <20120706101149.GA26028@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit x-cbid: 12070610-9574-0000-0000-000003776EC6 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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! Regards, Srivatsa S. Bhat