On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 12:35:12PM -0700, Ray Lee wrote:
Show 8 quoted lines
> On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 12:09 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> > > Finger-pointing, in these extreme cases, gives incentive to improve
> > > quality. It's a positive thing.
> >
> > Sorry, but I have to disagree. Negative finger-pointing is never a good thing.
>
> Correct, but let's be careful here. The original suggestion was,
> effectively, to get better metrics on the quality of contributions.
There already is one: reputation with people working on the tree,
be it actively modifying/reviewing/bug hunting/etc. _We_ _already_ _know_;
generally one gets a decent idea of what to expect pretty soon.
And frankly, that's the only thing that matters anyway; I suspect
I'd do rather well by proposed criteria, but you know what? I don't give
a flying f*ck through the rolling doughnut for self-appointed PHBs and
their idea of performance reviews.
Think of it as a modified Turing test: convince me that you are
not a script piped through an Eng.Lit. wanker or an MBA, then I might care
for your opinion.
Al, who never had problems with pointing fingers and laughing, but
likes an informed human brain to be the source of it...