On 11/04/2016 5:10 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> gordon chung wrote:
>> On 08/04/2016 1:26 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
>>> Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics:
>>> https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969
>>>
>>> It's pretty clear what's happening if you look here:
>>> http
On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 6:48 AM, Ihar Hrachyshka
wrote:
> Clint Byrum wrote:
>
> Excerpts from Morgan Fainberg's message of 2016-04-10 16:47:28 -0700:
>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
>>>
>>> Excerpts from Matt Riedemann's message of 2016-04-09 06:42:54 -0700:
>>>
-
From: Matt Riedemann [mailto:mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 09, 2016 9:43 AM
To: openstack-dev@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
Clint Byrum wrote:
Excerpts from Morgan Fainberg's message of 2016-04-10 16:47:28 -0700:
On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
Excerpts from Matt Riedemann's message of 2016-04-09 06:42:54 -0700:
There is also disincentive in +1ing a change that you don't understand
and is wr
gordon chung wrote:
On 08/04/2016 1:26 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics:
https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969
It's pretty clear what's happening if you look here:
https://review.openstack.org/#/q/owner:openstack-infra%2540lists.opensta
2016-04-11 10:31 GMT+09:00 Sheel Rana Insaan :
>> So should we add what we don't want
> to see people -1 for?
>
>>[1] http://docs.openstack.org/infra/manual/developers.html#peer-review
>
> This seems right way.. but concern is do everyone follow all docs?
Nice point. Yeah, I suppose that not every
> So should we add what we don't want
to see people -1 for?
>[1] http://docs.openstack.org/infra/manual/developers.html#peer-review
This seems right way.. but concern is do everyone follow all docs?
But atleast we should document it somewhere.
Regards,
Sheel Rana
On Apr 11, 2016 6:52 AM, "Masay
2016-04-11 9:46 GMT+09:00 Matt Riedemann :
>
>
> On 4/10/2016 6:37 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
>>
>> Excerpts from Matt Riedemann's message of 2016-04-09 06:42:54 -0700:
>>>
>>> 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
On 4/10/2016 6:37 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
Excerpts from Matt Riedemann's message of 2016-04-09 06:42:54 -0700:
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 disincent
Excerpts from Morgan Fainberg's message of 2016-04-10 16:47:28 -0700:
> On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
>
> > Excerpts from Matt Riedemann's message of 2016-04-09 06:42:54 -0700:
> > > There is also disincentive in +1ing a change that you don't understand
> > > and is wrong an
On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
> Excerpts from Matt Riedemann's message of 2016-04-09 06:42:54 -0700:
> > 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).
Excerpts from Matt Riedemann's message of 2016-04-09 06:42:54 -0700:
> 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
ent 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 [m
t; -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:mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com]
>
iginal Message-
From: Matt Riedemann [mailto:mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 09, 2016 9:43 AM
To: openstack-dev@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 explicitl
ack.markmail.org/thread/nj4onttaibjmfxew
> [2] https://code.google.com/p/gerrit/issues/detail?id=4050
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Matt Riedemann [mailto:mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com]
>> Sent: Saturday, April 09, 2016 9:43 AM
>> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
>&
rday, April 09, 2016 9:43 AM
> To: openstack-dev@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
I have a quick question:
How is anyone hurt out harmed by the practice? I agree it isn't helpful.
But it isn't harming either. It could be gaming and it could be ignorance -
mistakes by not knowing.
I'm asking because I see the same predictable personalities making passive
aggressive accusations a
On Apr 9, 2016 12:05, "Ken'ichi Ohmichi" wrote:
>
>
> 2016/04/08 10:55、Anita Kuno :
>
> >> On 04/08/2016 01:42 PM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote:
> >> 2016-04-08 19:26 GMT+02:00 Davanum Srinivas :
> >>
> >>> Team,
> >>>
> >>> Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics:
> >>> https://twitter.com/steveb
2016/04/08 10:55、Anita Kuno :
>> On 04/08/2016 01:42 PM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote:
>> 2016-04-08 19:26 GMT+02:00 Davanum Srinivas :
>>
>>> Team,
>>>
>>> Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics:
>>> https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969
>>
>>
>> There are many ways to game
t now.
-
Jay Faulkner
*From:* Dolph Mathews
*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 st
On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 11:39 PM, Diana Clarke
wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 5:23 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
>> To that effect, i am capturing stuff here:
>> https://davanum.wordpress.com/2016/04/08/new-to-openstack-reviews-start-here/
>
> Here are a few more links for your list, Dims. I rememb
On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 5:23 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> To that effect, i am capturing stuff here:
> https://davanum.wordpress.com/2016/04/08/new-to-openstack-reviews-start-here/
Here are a few more links for your list, Dims. I remember especially
liking Sean's blog post, and I think of it ofte
On 04/08/2016 05:16 PM, Anita Kuno wrote:
> On 04/08/2016 05:10 PM, gordon chung wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 08/04/2016 1:26 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
>>> Team,
>>>
>>> Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics:
>>> https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969
>>>
>>> It's pretty clear wh
__
From: Dolph Mathews
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 mailto:m...@not.mn>>
wrote:
On
Hi,
Steve, thanks for pointing that out and Dims, thanks for starting the
discussion.
I guess I feel that the drastic step is/may not be necessary. Here's the
reason why: we're trying to solve a subjective problem with a objective
solution. All systems have loopholes and there will be people who
On Apr 8, 2016, at 1:57 PM, Major Hayden wrote:
>
> On 04/08/2016 03:31 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
>> Thanks for taking this up--some people just need
>> encouragement/suggestions for better ways to make an impact. On the
>> other hand, if you find that many of them have addresses at the same
>> c
On 04/08/2016 05:53 PM, gordon chung wrote:
>
>
> On 08/04/2016 5:23 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 5:10 PM, gordon chung wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> is it actually affecting anything in the community aside from the
>>> reviews being useless. aside from the 'diversity' tags in gove
On 08/04/2016 5:23 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 5:10 PM, gordon chung wrote:
>>
>>
>> is it actually affecting anything in the community aside from the
>> reviews being useless. aside from the 'diversity' tags in governance,
>> does anything else use stackalytics?
>
> Gor
On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 5:10 PM, gordon chung wrote:
>
>
> On 08/04/2016 1:26 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
>> Team,
>>
>> Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics:
>> https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969
>>
>> It's pretty clear what's happening if you look here:
>> https://re
On 04/08/2016 05:10 PM, gordon chung wrote:
>
>
> On 08/04/2016 1:26 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
>> Team,
>>
>> Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics:
>> https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969
>>
>> It's pretty clear what's happening if you look here:
>> https://review.op
On 08/04/2016 1:26 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> Team,
>
> Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics:
> https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969
>
> It's pretty clear what's happening if you look here:
> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/owner:openstack-infra%2540lists.openstack
On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 4:54 PM, Dolph Mathews
wrote:
>
>
> On Friday, April 8, 2016, John Dickinson 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
On 04/08/2016 03:31 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> Thanks for taking this up--some people just need
> encouragement/suggestions for better ways to make an impact. On the
> other hand, if you find that many of them have addresses at the same
> company domain... well I guess we can find people higher up
On Friday, April 8, 2016, John Dickinson 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 alrea
On 04/08/2016 04:39 PM, John Dickinson 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 a
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 b
On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 4:31 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> On 2016-04-08 14:28:33 -0500 (-0500), Major Hayden wrote:
>> I'll take a sample of the folks listed there and contact them.
>> Hopefully I can provide some general results here soon.
>
> Thanks for taking this up--some people just need
> enco
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
l
On 2016-04-08 14:28:33 -0500 (-0500), Major Hayden wrote:
> I'll take a sample of the folks listed there and contact them.
> Hopefully I can provide some general results here soon.
Thanks for taking this up--some people just need
encouragement/suggestions for better ways to make an impact. On the
On 04/08/2016 03:28 PM, Major Hayden wrote:
> On 04/08/2016 02:25 PM, Anita Kuno wrote:
>> Nothing is stopping you from doing so. You can see the names and can
>> find the emails of those engaged in this by following the gerrit link
>> Dims posted in his first post.
>>
>> Perhaps as you say, the pe
On 04/08/2016 02:25 PM, Anita Kuno wrote:
> Nothing is stopping you from doing so. You can see the names and can
> find the emails of those engaged in this by following the gerrit link
> Dims posted in his first post.
>
> Perhaps as you say, the personal touch may help them to learn how to
> contr
On 04/08/2016 03:19 PM, Major Hayden wrote:
> On 04/08/2016 02:04 PM, Doug Wiegley wrote:
>> Are they using the numbers for some internal company purpose maybe? If so,
>> how does it matter to any of us?
>>
>> Chasing this tail just takes time away from useful things, IMO.
>
> Although I underst
On 04/08/2016 02:04 PM, Doug Wiegley wrote:
> Are they using the numbers for some internal company purpose maybe? If so,
> how does it matter to any of us?
>
> Chasing this tail just takes time away from useful things, IMO.
Although I understand the reasoning behind the effort underway in the r
On 04/08/2016 03:04 PM, Doug Wiegley wrote:
>
>> On Apr 8, 2016, at 11:26 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
>>
>> Team,
>>
>> Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics:
>> https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969
>>
>> It's pretty clear what's happening if you look here:
>> https://r
> On Apr 8, 2016, at 11:26 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
>
> Team,
>
> Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics:
> https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969
>
> It's pretty clear what's happening if you look here:
> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/owner:openstack-infra%2540li
On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 1:42 PM, Dmitry Tantsur
wrote:
>
> 2016-04-08 19:26 GMT+02:00 Davanum Srinivas :
>
>> Team,
>>
>> Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics:
>> https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969
>
>
> There are many ways to game a simple +1 counter, such as +1'ing
On 04/08/2016 01:42 PM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote:
> 2016-04-08 19:26 GMT+02:00 Davanum Srinivas :
>
>> Team,
>>
>> Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics:
>> https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969
>
>
> There are many ways to game a simple +1 counter, such as +1'ing changes
>
2016-04-08 19:26 GMT+02:00 Davanum Srinivas :
> Team,
>
> Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics:
> https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969
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,
On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 12:26 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> Team,
>
> Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics:
> https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969
>
> It's pretty clear what's happening if you look here:
>
> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/owner:openstack-infra%2540lis
Team,
Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics:
https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969
It's pretty clear what's happening if you look here:
https://review.openstack.org/#/q/owner:openstack-infra%2540lists.openstack.org+status:open
Here's the drastic step (i'd like to avoid)
51 matches
Mail list logo