Comments on: A join page workflow http://iquaid.org/2008/06/24/a-join-page-workflow/ ... the four laws of humanity ... Tue, 15 May 2012 07:18:22 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: loupgaroublond http://iquaid.org/2008/06/24/a-join-page-workflow/comment-page-1/#comment-2339 loupgaroublond Tue, 24 Jun 2008 23:46:45 +0000 http://iquaid.org/?p=100#comment-2339 One thing to consider. Doing 'TurboGears' does not mean I think in a certain way. I love to do web applications, but that does not mean I can pick up just any web application in the Fedora Infrastructure. What metric are you using to evaluate the newcomer's coding style? How are you comparing this to the body of projects we have in Fedora? Is this really going to be effective in the long run? One thing to consider. Doing ‘TurboGears’ does not mean I think in a certain way. I love to do web applications, but that does not mean I can pick up just any web application in the Fedora Infrastructure. What metric are you using to evaluate the newcomer’s coding style? How are you comparing this to the body of projects we have in Fedora? Is this really going to be effective in the long run?

]]> By: jef http://iquaid.org/2008/06/24/a-join-page-workflow/comment-page-1/#comment-2338 jef Tue, 24 Jun 2008 21:29:28 +0000 http://iquaid.org/?p=100#comment-2338 I would strongly suggest avoiding the karma/voting system on the general desirability of a specific task. Do we really want drive new, pontentially underskilled contributors to a list of ideas ranked by general popularity (ranked by people who are not stepping forward to do the work), over suitability? I have deep concerns over exposing any popularity ranking. I don't think popularity is a proper motivation for sustainable contribution. I'd rather try to find a way to rank that helps a new person find a project that is most suited towards their skills, their experience, and their time constraints. General desirability of one task relative to another is not an important factor in matching a specific person to a well suited task. As long as we know all the tasks in the list are desirable "enough" to show to potential contributors, we should not attempt to sort that list based on desirability. -jef I would strongly suggest avoiding the karma/voting system on the general desirability of a specific task. Do we really want drive new, pontentially underskilled contributors to a list of ideas ranked by general popularity (ranked by people who are not stepping forward to do the work), over suitability?

I have deep concerns over exposing any popularity ranking. I don’t think popularity is a proper motivation for sustainable contribution. I’d rather try to find a way to rank that helps a new person find a project that is most suited towards their skills, their experience, and their time constraints. General desirability of one task relative to another is not an important factor in matching a specific person to a well suited task.

As long as we know all the tasks in the list are desirable “enough” to show to potential contributors, we should not attempt to sort that list based on desirability.

-jef

]]> By: Jeremy Katz http://iquaid.org/2008/06/24/a-join-page-workflow/comment-page-1/#comment-2333 Jeremy Katz Tue, 24 Jun 2008 19:43:17 +0000 http://iquaid.org/?p=100#comment-2333 One thing to consider is that maybe we shouldn't be pushing people to create an account and sign the CLA until they've found an avenue of contribution. It'll help keep "dead" accounts out of the system and make it so that we have a more realistic idea of the size of our contributor base. eg, right now, there are apparently like 4069 contributors in cla_done, but only 1750 of them are in any other group (based on # of accounts on fedorapeople) One thing to consider is that maybe we shouldn’t be pushing people to create an account and sign the CLA until they’ve found an avenue of contribution. It’ll help keep “dead” accounts out of the system and make it so that we have a more realistic idea of the size of our contributor base.

eg, right now, there are apparently like 4069 contributors in cla_done, but only 1750 of them are in any other group (based on # of accounts on fedorapeople)

]]>