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 ESMTPS id 65CC9B8B for ; Sun, 12 Jul 2015 19:36:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from galahad.ideasonboard.com (galahad.ideasonboard.com [185.26.127.97]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E4DE3F2 for ; Sun, 12 Jul 2015 19:36:57 +0000 (UTC) From: Laurent Pinchart To: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2015 22:37:13 +0300 Message-ID: <3885915.kgX5jMVgvI@avalon> In-Reply-To: <201507080905.00051.PeterHuewe@gmx.de> References: <201507080121.41463.PeterHuewe@gmx.de> <201507080905.00051.PeterHuewe@gmx.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Cc: Josh Boyer , Jason Cooper Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] Recruitment (Reviewers, Testers, Maintainers, Hobbyists) List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wednesday 08 July 2015 09:04:58 Peter H=C3=BCwe wrote: > Am Mittwoch, 8. Juli 2015, 04:03:04 schrieb Krzysztof Koz=C5=82owski:= > > Before doing some work there is always a cause, an answer to "why I= am > > doing this"? Employer may pay for my commits but would he pay for > > reviewing time? That is his decision and it would be difficult to > > change policies inside companies. > >=20 > > Other reason for doing open source work may be the fame. Being > > recognizable, getting better job offers, doing tasks which are > > sensible and meaningful for someone. Currently probably most of the= > > fame goes to authors and maintainers. For example in the form of `g= it > > log --author/committer=3D` or LWN articles about statistics. > >=20 > > How to get more reviews from such people (when employer does not pa= y > > for it)? Give them fame! :) >=20 > Exactly! >=20 > This is also what Rafael wrote in the other mail: > > Most of the time there's a little to no recognition for doing that = work > > and, quite frankly, writing code is more rewarding than that for th= e > > majority of people anyway. >=20 > So changing our fame-statistics from commits to reviews and tested by= might > change the situation a bit. > -> The next LWN stats and coverage should probably focus on the revie= wed-by > / tested-by stats. > People love to be on some "top 10" lists - and also they can show som= ething > like that to their bosses. >=20 > "I've been a kernel reviewer and tester" -- meh, who cares > "I've been a top 100 kernel reviewer and tester over the last X relea= ses" -- > give him a raise/the job (esp. if kernel is not the core competency o= f the > company :) >=20 >=20 > Another thing I noticed over the last few years (also in corporate), = people > get really motivated by memorabilia - "tokens of appreciation". > E.g. I constantly wear my Google T-Shirt which I received for a contr= ibution > with such proud and so often that it is almost faded --- but still > everytime I look at it I have a good feeling. >=20 > --> Maybe LF can organize something? > "Here is a small token of appreciation (t-shirt, cup) for spending > countless hours on reviewing and testing stuff in the Linux kernel --= keep > up the good work" >=20 > > The only way to address this problem I can see is to recognize revi= ewers > > *much* more than we tend to do and not just "encourage" them, becau= se > > that's way insufficient. >=20 > Yes again! >=20 > What I definitely would also recommend is to organize some 'get toget= hers', > like a miniconf/minisummit at the next conference near you -- and whe= re you > grab a beer _together_ with the reviewers / testers afterwards (and m= aybe > the maintainer can pay). > This also helps as forms of appreciation. While real life meetings are invaluable, let's not forgot that they als= o have=20 a major drawback: not everybody can attend them. In a very distributed=20= development environment like the Linux kernel contributors come from ma= ny=20 different horizons, and not all of them can afford to attend conference= s (or=20 sometimes just don't want to, for various reasons). If we focus too muc= h on a=20 groups of contributors who can meet in real life we'll alienate the res= t of=20 the "online" crowd, and risk losing contributors who will feel left out= . --=20 Regards, Laurent Pinchart