Open Stack

++, exactly my thoughts.

I believe most people don't vote 0 for questions about the change because
'it won't count'.
That's really bad, IMHO 0 should be for asking things not clear in the
patch, whereas a -1 should be a 'this code here is not right'.

I believe the 0s should be tracked somehow.

Regards

2016-04-10 18:08 GMT+02:00 Joshua Harlow <harlowja at fastmail.com>:

> +1 from me also,
>
> I also use +0 for question asking and the like, because IMHO that's not
> what -1 are for. As for myself losing stackalytics stats when *I* do this
> (ie using +0 instead of -1), meh, I got better things in my life to
> think/care about :-P
>
> -Josh
>
>
> Nikhil Komawar wrote:
>
>> Thanks Amrith!
>>
>> I am a big supporter on including +0s.
>>
>> On 4/9/16 6:31 PM, Amrith Kumar wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks to Dims and Steve for bringing this up.
>>>
>>>         It has long been my opinion that +0's are invaluable for the
>>> question asking, and for getting to understand software, and unfortunately
>>> +0's are lost in the noise. So a while ago, I posted to the ML [1] asking
>>> about making +0's more visible. I signed up to submit a request on gerrit
>>> upstream (and promptly forgot to do that). This mail thread has reminded me
>>> of that. I have now posted a request for the upstream gerrit folks to fix
>>> [2].
>>>
>>>         I believe that people don't use +0's enough because they often
>>> get ignored. I know that one can be cynical and say it is because it gives
>>> one no credit in stackalytics; I choose not to be that person.
>>>
>>>         I post +0's a lot. But, I find that they are often ignored. If
>>> you agree with me that +0's are useful, and could be highlighted better in
>>> the gerrit review screen, please post a comment on [2].
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> -amrith
>>>
>>> [1] http://openstack.markmail.org/thread/nj4onttaibjmfxew
>>> [2] https://code.google.com/p/gerrit/issues/detail?id=4050
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Matt Riedemann [mailto:mriedem at linux.vnet.ibm.com]
>>>> Sent: Saturday, April 09, 2016 9:43 AM
>>>> To: openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics
>>>> stats
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 4/8/2016 5:54 PM, Jay Faulkner wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I know a lot of folks explicitly avoid a +0 vote with a comment
>>>>> because you don't get "credit" for it in statistics. Whether or not
>>>>> that should matter is another discussion, but there is a significant
>>>>> disincentive to no-voting right now.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -
>>>>>
>>>>> Jay Faulkner
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> --
>>>>> *From:* Dolph Mathews<dolph.mathews at gmail.com>
>>>>> *Sent:* Friday, April 8, 2016 1:54 PM
>>>>> *To:* OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the
>>>>> Stackalytics stats
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Friday, April 8, 2016, John Dickinson<me at not.mn
>>>>> <mailto: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 need
>>>>>       >>  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).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>      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.
>>>>>
>>>>>      --John
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ______________________________________________________________________
>>>>> ____ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>>>> Unsubscribe:
>>>>> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>>
>>>>> There is also disincentive in +1ing a change that you don't understand
>>>> and
>>>> is wrong and then a core comes along and -1s it (you get dinged for the
>>>> disagreement). And there is disincentive in -1ing a change for the wrong
>>>> reasons (silly nits or asking questions for understanding). I ask a lot
>>>> of
>>>> questions in a lot of changes and I don't vote on those because it would
>>>> be inappropriate.
>>>>
>>>> I also notice when "newcomers" are asking good questions for
>>>> understanding
>>>> and not voting on them, it shows me they are trying to learn and are
>>>> getting invested in the project, not just trying to pad stats. Those are
>>>> the people we look to mentor into bigger roles in the project team, be
>>>> that working on subteams or eventually looking at for the core reviewer
>>>> team.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Matt Riedemann
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> __________________________________________________________________________
>>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>>> Unsubscribe:
>>>> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>
>>>
>>> __________________________________________________________________________
>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>> Unsubscribe:
>>> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>
>>
>>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20160410/8917d227/attachment.html>