From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C303585D for ; Sun, 25 May 2014 04:56:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx2.suse.de (cantor2.suse.de [195.135.220.15]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2325C1F8A0 for ; Sun, 25 May 2014 04:56:18 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sun, 25 May 2014 14:56:07 +1000 From: NeilBrown To: Guenter Roeck Message-ID: <20140525145607.4acf2a4d@notabene.brown> In-Reply-To: <5380F092.3070600@roeck-us.net> References: <1400925225.6956.25.camel@dabdike.int.hansenpartnership.com> <20140524111927.GA3455@katana> <5380F092.3070600@roeck-us.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/ot=UwQzEwvT4KqzEURbgoga"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Cc: James Bottomley , ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [TOPIC] Encouraging more reviewers List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , --Sig_/ot=UwQzEwvT4KqzEURbgoga Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, 24 May 2014 12:18:42 -0700 Guenter Roeck wrote: > > > > The thing I'd like to see way more in the Linux ecosystem: > > > > Paid reviewers/maintainers (selected people, no hiring offers). The > > number of developers increases faster than the number of quality > > keepers. So, the latter should be given the chance to focus on it, if > > they want to. > > >=20 > Problem with that is that in most company hierarchies code reviewers > get little if no credit for their work. If anything, I have seen > the opposite - code reviewers, if they take their responsibility > serious, end up getting blamed for project delays because they keep > finding problems in the code. >=20 > Imagine a project where one employee writes the code and another > reviews it. Who do you think will get the credit (and bonus) ? > I bet it will be the person who wrote the code, not the person > who made sure that it is clean and free of bugs. >=20 Sounds like a job for the Linux Foundation (easy for me to say ....). Get funding and/or secondment from members and use it to appoint reviewers. Their role and remuneration would be focussed (solely) on review-for-upstream-acceptance. I'm sure there are people who can do the work, and probably even some who enjoy doing the work. So I assume that they aren't given enough time to do that work. And time =3D=3D money. NeilBrown --Sig_/ot=UwQzEwvT4KqzEURbgoga Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQIVAwUBU4F35znsnt1WYoG5AQJq+g/9HRosiokN1LUfqPR4hEf7MFRJ7Mn99Dzp 8bwua56y+5VReRDN/Gc82DEnt3KU5dLAV1rDCvBarmEHqxMQkwrLLkk2lOR806eG jG3Pr0hqKiXc5KL46m12xUHQtB5P7IWPs1fIuoAGsPbolkLnAzypfvCwZtcYv4h0 BNcaYeGDWjbmEDUCCYb5RuWOc+Auo/R0PO8Nn2Q0STpDxmcjfNxsJY05sNArsyuj LqyFGOLkNiJ6ZYrZiP8d61oel9Sf76y58cA7s7zaF5zuh9skaHu55V00iqI85IeD uc8lAL9ISqg9mOkXjw4j3fcDSeaUwFwETY3ZMU14D74V5nW+MSzLaOzzu8n5ifIw Y9h0IgofQq2TaHC1LFbeSV5ChjF5fx9oIKHiKZXR7mjsm3VRblO2EAwzuixvpA5c vcMFxT2WUyDmtSNZhZmuYkLRI/gW97rBSX54S8tKmHzSj6oU0d9zxnd0ktg+kxnp YtAnfgVWDw/ccC9U/bhLeVA69cDwqbdt4dmXptO5jByBxDTFIsN3+C/9Em2xAJvw QgEMcI+5t8yir9jKq9e24Q1yVwzv91ku2lnrqGM8rpLdJGQB9P4KoXWk+mf3YiAa xXe9a636x2dXNeaDqkEtJeqtrpSD6UbTRpaWO7mZXPSNwfsc+oR8yLDNn5ZX+ixY +VhUZs7Su8c= =+TQ0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/ot=UwQzEwvT4KqzEURbgoga--