Expand on culture around metrics
In the First Contact SIG meeting we surmised that perhaps one reason we see many low-value high-volume commits from some contributors was due to pressure from their employer[1]. This rewording is an attempt to clarify to organizations what we expect and need from contributors and discouraging gaming the system. [1] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/fc_sig/2019/fc_sig.2019-01-30-07.01.log.html#l-176 Change-Id: I6da20511eb51e082fd13a9ba3403da99da264bd3
This commit is contained in:
parent
24f6e7cab2
commit
761a4ae47c
|
@ -241,7 +241,18 @@ Community Culture
|
|||
painful process (via links to further reading on effective open source
|
||||
community involvement)
|
||||
|
||||
* Good metrics are hard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law .
|
||||
* The community does not officially endorse Stackalytics, a contribution
|
||||
statistics gathering service hosted by Mirantis. The community does not
|
||||
encourage attempting to boost one's contribution statistics by
|
||||
proposing large quantities of low-value commits or voting on large
|
||||
numbers of change proposals without providing thoughtful reviews.
|
||||
Activities like this appear to other members of the community as an
|
||||
attempt to game the system and contributors who engage in this will
|
||||
often lose credibility for themselves and their employers in the community.
|
||||
Instead, contributors should try to engage deeply with a single project or a
|
||||
small number of projects to gain understanding of the software component and
|
||||
build relationships with the other contributors for that project.
|
||||
|
||||
* Focusing staff on particular project areas, or towards particular goals is
|
||||
more effective than asking them to track activity over many projects.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue