[openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats
morgan.fainberg at gmail.com
Fri Apr 8 21:02:22 UTC 2016
On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 4:54 PM, Dolph Mathews <dolph.mathews at gmail.com>
> On Friday, April 8, 2016, John Dickinson <me at not.mn> wrote:
>> On 8 Apr 2016, at 13:35, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
>> > On 2016-04-08 19:42:18 +0200 (+0200), Dmitry Tantsur wrote:
>> >> There are many ways to game a simple +1 counter, such as +1'ing changes
>> >> that already have at least 1x +2, or which already approved, or which
>> >> rechecking...
>> > [...]
>> > The behavior which baffles me, and also seems to be on the rise
>> > lately, is random +1 votes on changes whose commit messages and/or
>> > status clearly indicate they should not merged and do not need to be
>> > reviewed. I suppose that's another an easy way to avoid the dreaded
>> > "disagreements" counter?
>> > --
>> > Jeremy Stanley
>> I have been told that some OpenStack on boarding teaches new members of
>> the community to do reviews. And they say, effectively, "muddle through as
>> you can. You won't understand it all at first, but do your best. When
>> you're done, add a +1 and move to the next one"
> I advocate for basically this, but instead of a +1, leave a +0 and ask
> questions. The new reviewer will inevitably learn something and the author
> will benefit by explaining their change (teaching is the best way to learn).
This is exactly what I tell people to do as well! Definitely a good
direction to encourage folks to go.
>> I've been working to correct this when I've seen it, but +1 reviews with
>> no comments might not be people trying to game. It might simply be people
>> trying to get involved that don't know any better yet.
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the OpenStack-dev