From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <jason@lakedaemon.net>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ACE9C305
	for <ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Sat, 11 Jul 2015 01:06:22 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pmta2.delivery5.ore.mailhop.org
	(pmta2.delivery5.ore.mailhop.org [54.186.218.12])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 49CF8208
	for <ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Sat, 11 Jul 2015 01:06:22 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2015 01:06:19 +0000
From: Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>
To: josh@joshtriplett.org
Message-ID: <20150711010619.GY23515@io.lakedaemon.net>
References: <1436414798.23558.3.camel@ellerman.id.au>
	<559EBD4C.6030502@gmail.com> <20150709190640.GC788@roeck-us.net>
	<20150709194734.GG9169@vmdeb7> <20150709201315.GF9417@thunk.org>
	<20150709205049.GB5154@roeck-us.net>
	<20150709214718.GG9417@thunk.org>
	<20150710182045.GA19854@roeck-us.net>
	<20150710185800.GW23515@io.lakedaemon.net>
	<20150710210040.GD10533@cloud>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150710210040.GD10533@cloud>
Cc: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
	jic23@jic23.retrosnub.co.uk, ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] Recruitment (Reviewers, Testers,
 Maintainers, Hobbyists)
List-Id: <ksummit-discuss.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/ksummit-discuss>,
	<mailto:ksummit-discuss-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/ksummit-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ksummit-discuss-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ksummit-discuss>,
	<mailto:ksummit-discuss-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>

On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 02:00:40PM -0700, josh@joshtriplett.org wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 06:58:00PM +0000, Jason Cooper wrote:
> > I've personally seen it, and I don't think I'm alone.  It seems to follow
> > a pattern of:
> > 
> >  - Manager/HR thinks counting tags is a useful metric (#!@$ laziness).
> >  - tag-count becomes an evaluation item.
> >  - Pay raises are affected.
> >  - patch submitters do the obvious.
> >  - maintainers weep and die a little inside.
> > 
> > The easy ones to spot are multiple-S-o-bs.  I've actually been told "No,
> > he didn't write any code, I was just trying to help him out."
> 
> On the flip side, I've submitted patches with two Signed-off-by tags
> specifically because both people actually wrote the code and are
> agreeing to the DCO (and more generally claiming responsibility/blame
> for the patch), 

This seems perfectly sane to me.

> and gotten complaints from maintainers that it "doesn't
> reflect the chain of git trees the patch went through" or similar.
> Which seems ridiculous.

Agreed.

thx,

Jason.