On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 7:30 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I just realized another thing about "the source of trust". The > "statistics" would count _only_ what gets accepted, but maintainers and > list participants have much richer set of datapoints to judge the > strengths and weaknesses of contributors --- rejects. I think I know where this is coming from and what you say makes sense. > An early round of contribution from somebody needs deeper review if the > contributor has a history of taking many rounds of refinements to get a > rather trivial change into an acceptable shape. IOW, over time people can > learn who are meticulous and who are careless from rejection counts, which > is not recorded in the committed history. Yup, in order to gather that kind of data a more elaborate tool (one that is integrated with a review tool like Rietveld or such) together with the VCS would be required. I'm confident that this project will result in useful statistics. Perhaps they will not be enough to determine which patches to let in and which ones to reject without human interference (I'm actually quite sure that won't happen), but I do think other useful statistics may be gathered and used nevertheless. -- Cheers, Sverre Rabbelier -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
