Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their younger versions might not have agreed with it, but some people do mellow out in their old age. In this case, to me it's clear that he is doing a large turnaround, which validates Wyager's statement that he did not care too much before.
I'm not sure what that means, or what basis there is for any of it ? The basis for my comment was Torvalds' own statements and actions, and he's a pretty good source for Torvalds and for effective management and communication in the Linux community. Do you know him personally? Are you a maintainer?
“Please don't waste maintainers' time on your KPI grabbing patches”
241–250 of 277 posts
Re: “Please don't waste maintainers' time on your KPI grabbing patches”
#242Re: “Please don't waste maintainers' time on your KPI grabbing patches”
#243Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not really: "Who Controls Huawei?" https://www.ui.se/globalassets/butiken/ui-paper/2020/ui-pape... "Technical dependency and the issue of party-state control over Huawei" "...While at first glance Huawei’s line of defence appears convincing, there are also reasons for doubt. It is true that the company is privately owned by its employees, but there is reason to believe that ownership does not come with control..." ".…
Not really what? The article you linked acknowledges the legal reasons that Huawei's employee share ownership was set up the way it was (limits on the number of individuals that private Chinese companies were legally allowed to distribute stares to). Most of the concerns the author has with Huawei are really just general concerns about any company in China - namely that the state theoretically could exert influence o…
Re: “Please don't waste maintainers' time on your KPI grabbing patches”
#244Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s incredibly disrespectful. With that approach, I would be shocked if anyone would want to contribute to your project again after such behavior.
Maybe it's easy to feel it's disrespectful because they've made social networks out of contributing to repositories. Accreditation for the modification of petty and trivial issues is a nice and decent gesture, but overall unworthy of a paper trail binding me to any random none-of-my-business project for such a drive-by PR. Personally, I would feel more comfortable sending that kind of inane PRs if the parent's way of…
I don't know about others, but before investing significant time in a project, my first action will be to read through the documentation, then the code (and accompanying comments), and then I'll make minor fixes along the way.
After this, I'll submit a PR with my changes. If a maintainer were to close my patch and then proceed to commit the exact same changes under their own name, I'd never contribute, use, or improve that project again. Why would I waste my time?
That kind of behavior displays an immense lack of respect for contributors.
Re: “Please don't waste maintainers' time on your KPI grabbing patches”
#245Earlier quoted context omitted.
Overuse law. If you overuse a law too much it stops being meaningful. Organizations have hard time improving without measuring their performance and communicating incentives. There isn't magical solution you can scribe on a paper and tell everybody -- this is exactly what you need to do to achieve success. The best what you can do is compromise, it is unavoidable. So we know setting targets can make wrong incentives.…
The point they're trying to make is, I believe, that metrics shouldn't be targets. In a sense I think that this is obvious to anyone with a rudimentary understanding of applied statistics.
Metrics are either (1) targets or (2) things that you are trying to analyze in relation to the metrics that are targets or (3) a waste of the time you spent gathering them.
The reason metrics are often bad when they become targets is the metrics arr usually not actual direct measures of goals, but things assumed to be convenient proxies, but when you push hard on optimizing them, they stop being good proxies because as well as being easier to measure than the real objective, once you pick any low-hanging productive fruit they are inevitably easier to improve in ways that don’t improve the real objective as much as the proxy (or at all, or which negatively impact it.)
Re: “Please don't waste maintainers' time on your KPI grabbing patches”
#246Re: “Please don't waste maintainers' time on your KPI grabbing patches”
#247Earlier quoted context omitted.
"When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure."
Corollary: "Businesses that base their growth on A/B testing only, turn into gambling or pornography".
A/B and telemetry-worship reminds me of something I posted on Fedi earlier. Pasting it below:
---
"Guys, I have an idea. Let's make a browser optimized for the kind of people who don't opt out of telemetry, and market it to privacy-conscious people." -- Top minds at Mozilla Corp
If you market to privacy-conscious people and you base all your decisions on data from telemetry, you're gonna get a very skewed perspective. You'll see disproportionate representation from fans (people who want to enable telemetry because they love Mozilla and want to help, and will rationalize any decision Mozilla makes) and very non-technical users who don't know what telemetry is and how opt-in/out works. Technical users who disable stuff like telemetry, analytics, etc. are going to look like a rounding error.
This explains a lot of Firefox's changes.
Re: “Please don't waste maintainers' time on your KPI grabbing patches”
#248Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is trite. Just about any way of understanding something is going to create perverse incentives. Keeping the metrics secret has other problems too. I don't think there is a a good solution. Maybe with radically shortened work hours and less pay disparity, the strives can strive off the job instead.
Actually I'm being silly, there is a good solution: Workplace Democracy. You can fool the higher ups come promotion time, but you can't fool all the people all the time. Mondragon please get in the tech biz.
Re: “Please don't waste maintainers' time on your KPI grabbing patches”
#249Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the email was completely effective in denouncing a behavior. Telling people to "fuck off" isn't required (nor desired, in my opinion). Linux health happened *despite* Linus' manners, not because of them.
As others have pointed out, that's speculation. I have trouble understanding why it bothers people so much that Linus is rude sometimes. You don't have to interact with him if you don't want. You can even contribute to the kernel without interacting with him. Whatever he's been doing has been working for going on 3 decades now, I don't see a burning need to change it because it bothers some outsiders. There's this we…
Can people actually point to instances where he was rude?
Re: “Please don't waste maintainers' time on your KPI grabbing patches”
#250Earlier quoted context omitted.
As I am not a Chinese speaker..do you confirm there is in the thread a comment that the maintainer is also Chinese ? I am concerned about possible pressure from Huawei and its "shareholders": https://www.bbc.com/news/business-53172057 to a Kernel maintainer. Looking at the heavy down votes my post got its not a concern here...
Your post are downvoted because it is borderline racist. The maintainer happened to be Chinese and that gave you 'chills'. There are 1.4 billion Chinese and most of them live in China, there are also open source projects hosted in China, and a lot of open source contribution coming from people living in China, if only because there are many people there. The media links you posted are also made of conjecture ('Trump…
[0] https://www.justice.gov/usao-az/pr/former-raytheon-engineer-...
[1] https://globalnews.ca/news/7275588/inside-the-chinese-milita...
[2] https://blogs.cisco.com/news/huawei-and-ciscos-source-code-c...