From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms0.migadu.com with LMTPS id ADDwKlCCcWGAswAAgWs5BA (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 21 Oct 2021 17:08:00 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id AHyoJlCCcWEMUAAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 21 Oct 2021 15:08:00 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A9866957D for ; Thu, 21 Oct 2021 17:07:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1]:53644 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mdZfi-0006kL-PQ for larch@yhetil.org; Thu, 21 Oct 2021 11:07:58 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:52470) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mdZf9-0006iU-OH for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Oct 2021 11:07:24 -0400 Received: from mail-io1-xd34.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::d34]:46868) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mdZf7-0001Ta-1M; Thu, 21 Oct 2021 11:07:23 -0400 Received: by mail-io1-xd34.google.com with SMTP id n77so1349386iod.13; Thu, 21 Oct 2021 08:07:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ecWtqDufY7SYuXoH0xKoejHjOg//k2aoTQDGwBeF46U=; b=UAb7GMwUiQsOJJoNmroDEFctIJNYrEaCq3e2Umymno3sTFojeBb5ELWs1EAA0W36bh xhUh9NIBADoWF5ZilE9lWdLR2AzrfximSRP82v6xqgKLUnkXzWJl3tCwvwLFtGYRpRUW OkZnB4JtMbYkRiZHVGeLSkFF12OF3MIqFG+qqjh8IoV8CC687HHvA2BPnb+rkxPtVPsP hnSaIqdCktxG2ckOXIx5tUbKXOccGX7wkJfuW8UUcn/xRFl1+4Ev6yGT8vKXDndFM9ak okupoazofw7sCTTD/n3V+EKr7xKhZE33RHyq5hVOFnHfFW+dOnbrc4HpG5OXJWjU1/TS nzFA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ecWtqDufY7SYuXoH0xKoejHjOg//k2aoTQDGwBeF46U=; b=FkZV6fsOtk7RTTK01syNC33EemqUV4hUwtNqGIPA0j0JxP4IDqQ8WbQJO678fzqZur 3Q/TK9DzazXe2XBJuwev7P+RXr8oq5vwRjiWjwEvdZeGGsx7hAuiT4L0OqDjP4gtmZW/ +FwPW3/Sp2q/hHMPT0u6S6HBTHYwaL7jm00uh8EuFVhNPiKP3o4TNCtfVQUxfFQkcRV5 jZTYzs13JUcNTMp7yMIP8vKKs7X1zn54b7l2ht0npger6fjMKw+ZF32CzoNoFhSG/6as ZjxyaDtBmf3PCq1Y7O8zUU3Ea6e+iZHhSUTHOXMU3lJOV2Y8kd45ec4TbFD1ccthbsOo VGVQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5320gV7GRuf4xHTQCz8aoyeYVF13hcH6uP02BImf7eeUlqT+NqQ4 aCPYA08zwSQzI5fPfKMRHOYX+ulr7aY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxtzJ8j6dnziLWAOtmaKySumvif4QomVCfum8pCdvOAK04+AapHNlENPspMI2+D3cf3ZO/eZQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6602:134d:: with SMTP id i13mr4501557iov.164.1634828838690; Thu, 21 Oct 2021 08:07:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from washu-v4 (172-221-246-205.res.spectrum.com. [172.221.246.205]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j17sm2698787ilq.1.2021.10.21.08.07.17 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 21 Oct 2021 08:07:18 -0700 (PDT) From: Katherine Cox-Buday To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Subject: Re: Incentives for review References: <874k9if7am.fsf@inria.fr> <86ee8hfm1k.fsf@gmail.com> <87sfwx896z.fsf@inria.fr> <86k0i9drh5.fsf@gmail.com> <87mtn56mzg.fsf_-_@inria.fr> Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2021 10:07:16 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87mtn56mzg.fsf_-_@inria.fr> ("Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= =?utf-8?Q?=22's?= message of "Tue, 19 Oct 2021 17:41:23 +0200") Message-ID: <87cznyfmcb.fsf@gmail.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::d34; envelope-from=cox.katherine.e@gmail.com; helo=mail-io1-xd34.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1634828879; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:list-id:list-help: list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=ecWtqDufY7SYuXoH0xKoejHjOg//k2aoTQDGwBeF46U=; b=R+3A4dhENZEhDlN+fl9QQI0iUFZs72WNiyF2ncJwQwHihe4iPetxTKo4ioDBUOhF4xHY4F 6DWtbwYz/hX5noQ8Z4rXr2lj1nOh7sSR1ZBq7uX0Od1FvJvq9nl+8RGNaw0Nsu7socmxD3 QztLy+Q52yDSiUKlGNp84k8eibfTMxii9//eLFi7uCtBZMCkLFJDH7Hx4aEprGigT0Ncp5 c3FGKwBdTYFiibSR9oVbRiw6Bnn5r86OvXMWe/8Z5Onbj6jXQOdzNZ8OJ6Qx2+xNZY7eQj 1yUQudfSYs0DTAiK5j+OvfLnMeYzEQ0Jq2dJF5wHQcrpDndGW3gbl+gJU7R9mA== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1634828879; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=kIjYjawYOiNjXXHHiBbuSCmcv9vFqAEQKozcf0voykCntHNfumrJLoCsUQkh3hbEr6QNtG xjPZQp6tcY51Nk9+FU0bzbzhjKpVTuCMan++PEPWGN1YnXYKK4AeUTaEu25cNmg0MCHopt oDpoBB25Nlip4WugmtHHfD8HWZE8BiqWmnR3cmUR2Ms0/XOlrz5cf0JLd+uU0tOLqZW/X9 1SRrJxQJZ50+jNk8wBCjIHGbF1gCQ1mYZRXXxSzFOJwE6H53YVFv0OLCdW0xWPX/nRqOng mepG+S5RgI4mMqplU+frVBJi/+4WUJqa+SXgi8noLacBSKbIQS7Q9fXoculd4A== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=UAb7GMwU; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed)" header.from=gmail.com (policy=none); spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -0.23 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=UAb7GMwU; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed)" header.from=gmail.com (policy=none); spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: A9866957D X-Spam-Score: -0.23 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn1.migadu.com X-TUID: GYHoLhkR/xD8 Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes: >> On Tue, 19 Oct 2021 at 14:56, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s > But I also view things from a different angle: everyone contributes in th= eir > own way, and each contribution is a gift. Maybe selfishly, but I really agree with this. I think this is just the nat= ure of community-based projects: people are going to scratch their own itch= , and when time allows, do altruistic things for other people. Some people (e.g. me) don't have very much time at all to do the altruistic= things (which gnaws at me). I do what I can, when I can, and hope that som= eone else benefits. > A good middle ground may be to provide incentives for review. How? I=E2= =80=99m > not sure exactly, but first by making it clear that review is makes the > project move forward and is invaluable. > >>> I think it=E2=80=99s about finding the right balance to be reasonably e= fficient >>> while not compromising on quality. >> >> I totally agree. And I do not see nor understand where is the >> inefficiency here when asking to go via guix-patches and wait two weeks >> for adding a new package. Often I find that people on projects/teams have fundamentally different und= erstandings of what reviews are for. Are they quality control? Mentoring op= portunities? Opportunities to teach others how something new works? A way t= o encourage cohesiveness in the project? It can help to publicly state the intent somewhere. I think the word "revie= w" is mentioned in the manual 11 times, but nowhere does it say what the re= view's purpose is. Large, public projects like Guix are a bit different, so I'm not sure this = applies, but reviews meant to be gates on quality are my least favorite: (Please note: these are general observations about the industry and not nec= essarily specific to Guix) - The reviewers are human too, and there are various circumstances where th= ey will miss things. Some of the most insidious forms of this is are: tragedy of the commons, i.e. > Submitter: They always do such a good job catching things. I think this= is > good, but I know they'll catch any issues. > Reviewer: I feel bad this has sat for so long, this person usually does= a > good job. +1 without a detailed review. > Submitter: A +1! It must not have had any issues. - Unavoidably, because of human nature, groups form, and certain people experience less friction getting patches in. See the last point. - There is a feedback loop present: those who have committed earlier have control and are more likely to reject later commits which don't do things= as they would have. Sometimes "quality" is abused as a cover for opinion. Ve= ry few people are doing this maliciously, but it still happens. - As I mentioned in another thread[1], trying to chase the ideal of quality may actually be worse in the end, or be a local maxima for quality or utility. Focusing on velocity may help achieve the global maxima for both. As always, there is a balance. > It=E2=80=99s not about urgency but rather about not contributing to the g= rowth > of our patch backlog, which is a real problem. I have often seen folks on various projects worried about the size of vario= us backlogs: bugs, issues, etc. I think it is human to want to try and cont= ain something that appears to be growing, unbounded. I think the thing that bothers us is a sense that the backlog is becoming u= nmanageable, or too large to triage. I submit that this is actually a tooli= ng and organizational issue, and not an intrinsic issue to be solved. Bugs = may still be valid; patches may still have valuable bones to modify. I think the real issue is that as a backlog grows, the tools we're used to = using cannot answer the questions we want to ask: what is most relevant to = me or the project right now? To me, this sounds like a search and display problem. [1] - https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2021-10/msg00081.html --=20 Katherine