git@vger.kernel.org list mirror (unofficial, one of many)
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
* Reviewed-by given by celebrities (no subject matter expertise on Git development)
@ 2021-04-02  5:45 Bagas Sanjaya
  2021-04-04  2:27 ` Junio C Hamano
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Bagas Sanjaya @ 2021-04-02  5:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: git; +Cc: Junio C Hamano

Alright so let's imagine this situation.

Supposed that all developers here take a break from Git ML
(except Junio the maintainer of Git). Many celebrities (public figures
like singers and actors) are instead reviewing patches here (with no
subject matter expertise on Git, let alone programming languages and
software development in general). Almost all patches reviewed by them
are given Reviewed-by trailer from them.

The situation above is roughly similar to some TV programs when
celebrities comment on interesting and unique moments happened
all around the world, with little or no subject matter expertise
regarding the subject being commented.

Junio, what will you do in such situation above (celebrities reviewing
patches and giving Reviewed-by despite of lack of subject matter
expertise)?

-- 
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: Reviewed-by given by celebrities (no subject matter expertise on Git development)
  2021-04-02  5:45 Reviewed-by given by celebrities (no subject matter expertise on Git development) Bagas Sanjaya
@ 2021-04-04  2:27 ` Junio C Hamano
  2021-04-07 20:24   ` Jeff King
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2021-04-04  2:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Bagas Sanjaya; +Cc: git

Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com> writes:

> Junio, what will you do in such situation above (celebrities reviewing
> patches and giving Reviewed-by despite of lack of subject matter
> expertise)?

I find the scenario highly unlikely, and I do not see the point of
wasting my time on a trick question, thinking about what I would do
in a scenario that is not realistic, so I was tempted to ignore this
message.  If you have something you really want to ask, ask it
directly instead.

But I'll make it an exception this case, since you are relatively
new.

I do not think the celebrity status of a person who sends a
Reviewed-by matters.  What matters aroud here is the quality of
review that comes with "Reviewed-by".

Just a "Reviewed-by" without comments would most likely not count at
all, unless the perceived competence and expertise the reviewer
possesses in the area is reasonably high.

The "perceived" is a rather important word here.  It does not matter
how good one actually is.  One must have had demonstrated one's
competence and expertise on the list sufficiently to earn trust by
other readers on the list for one's "Reviewed-by" to really count.

"I read the patch with fine toothed comb, I found it very well done,
I have nothing else to add.", coming from somebody who is KNOWN to
know the area the patch touches well, would mean a lot.  When the
same statement was given by somebody who hasn't earned the trust of
the collective mind on the list, regardless of the celebrity status,
would mean a lot less.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: Reviewed-by given by celebrities (no subject matter expertise on Git development)
  2021-04-04  2:27 ` Junio C Hamano
@ 2021-04-07 20:24   ` Jeff King
  2021-04-07 20:57     ` Junio C Hamano
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jeff King @ 2021-04-07 20:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: Bagas Sanjaya, git

On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 07:27:12PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > Junio, what will you do in such situation above (celebrities reviewing
> > patches and giving Reviewed-by despite of lack of subject matter
> > expertise)?
> 
> I find the scenario highly unlikely, and I do not see the point of
> wasting my time on a trick question, thinking about what I would do
> in a scenario that is not realistic, so I was tempted to ignore this
> message.  If you have something you really want to ask, ask it
> directly instead.
> 
> But I'll make it an exception this case, since you are relatively
> new.
> 
> I do not think the celebrity status of a person who sends a
> Reviewed-by matters.  What matters aroud here is the quality of
> review that comes with "Reviewed-by".
> 
> Just a "Reviewed-by" without comments would most likely not count at
> all, unless the perceived competence and expertise the reviewer
> possesses in the area is reasonably high.
> 
> The "perceived" is a rather important word here.  It does not matter
> how good one actually is.  One must have had demonstrated one's
> competence and expertise on the list sufficiently to earn trust by
> other readers on the list for one's "Reviewed-by" to really count.
> 
> "I read the patch with fine toothed comb, I found it very well done,
> I have nothing else to add.", coming from somebody who is KNOWN to
> know the area the patch touches well, would mean a lot.  When the
> same statement was given by somebody who hasn't earned the trust of
> the collective mind on the list, regardless of the celebrity status,
> would mean a lot less.

I don't usually post "me too" responses, since they are usually just
noise. But I could not resist it here, for two reasons:

  - this is such a nicely written summary of what "Reviewed-by" means in
    our project that I think it deserves some praise. :)

  - because it is ultimately about "what does Reviewed-by mean within
    the Git project", there is some small value in having another
    project member say "yes, that is exactly what I expect from it,
    too"

-Peff

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: Reviewed-by given by celebrities (no subject matter expertise on Git development)
  2021-04-07 20:24   ` Jeff King
@ 2021-04-07 20:57     ` Junio C Hamano
  2021-04-07 21:18       ` Jeff King
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2021-04-07 20:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jeff King; +Cc: Bagas Sanjaya, git

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

> I don't usually post "me too" responses, since they are usually just
> noise. But I could not resist it here, for two reasons:
>
>   - this is such a nicely written summary of what "Reviewed-by" means in
>     our project that I think it deserves some praise. :)
>
>   - because it is ultimately about "what does Reviewed-by mean within
>     the Git project", there is some small value in having another
>     project member say "yes, that is exactly what I expect from it,
>     too"

Heh, thanks.

Are you hinting that some of what I wrote (with typofixes like
s/arond/around/) should be inserted to SubmittingPatches or
somewhere near it?

I am still scratching my head why "celebrities" were brought into
the original question in the first place, but I can say that we do
not discriminate against "celebrities" who review patches with
prejudice like "that lady only plays a hacker on TV, and must know
nothing to qualify to review our patches."  Celebrities or not, once
somebody demonstrates enough competence and earns reputation on this
list, opinions by that person would count more than others.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: Reviewed-by given by celebrities (no subject matter expertise on Git development)
  2021-04-07 20:57     ` Junio C Hamano
@ 2021-04-07 21:18       ` Jeff King
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jeff King @ 2021-04-07 21:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: Bagas Sanjaya, git

On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 01:57:10PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> 
> > I don't usually post "me too" responses, since they are usually just
> > noise. But I could not resist it here, for two reasons:
> >
> >   - this is such a nicely written summary of what "Reviewed-by" means in
> >     our project that I think it deserves some praise. :)
> >
> >   - because it is ultimately about "what does Reviewed-by mean within
> >     the Git project", there is some small value in having another
> >     project member say "yes, that is exactly what I expect from it,
> >     too"
> 
> Heh, thanks.
> 
> Are you hinting that some of what I wrote (with typofixes like
> s/arond/around/) should be inserted to SubmittingPatches or
> somewhere near it?

I would not be opposed to that, but I also do not want to create more
work for you. :)

-Peff

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2021-04-07 21:18 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-04-02  5:45 Reviewed-by given by celebrities (no subject matter expertise on Git development) Bagas Sanjaya
2021-04-04  2:27 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-04-07 20:24   ` Jeff King
2021-04-07 20:57     ` Junio C Hamano
2021-04-07 21:18       ` Jeff King

git@vger.kernel.org list mirror (unofficial, one of many)

This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:

	git clone --mirror https://public-inbox.org/git
	git clone --mirror http://ou63pmih66umazou.onion/git
	git clone --mirror http://czquwvybam4bgbro.onion/git
	git clone --mirror http://hjrcffqmbrq6wope.onion/git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V1 git git/ https://public-inbox.org/git \
		git@vger.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index git

Example config snippet for mirrors.
Newsgroups are available over NNTP:
	nntp://news.public-inbox.org/inbox.comp.version-control.git
	nntp://ou63pmih66umazou.onion/inbox.comp.version-control.git
	nntp://czquwvybam4bgbro.onion/inbox.comp.version-control.git
	nntp://hjrcffqmbrq6wope.onion/inbox.comp.version-control.git
	nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.version-control.git
 note: .onion URLs require Tor: https://www.torproject.org/

code repositories for project(s) associated with this inbox:

	https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git

AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git