Some of us gotten used to producing large quantities of peer feedback at work, every 3 or 6 months. Extending the same courtesy to community members seems like a logical step. It may be hard for some folks to get validation of how important their work is internally, especially at smaller companies which don't employ many kernel experts. The concept of "peer feedback" may be a hyperscaler / silicon valley thing so YMMV. Hopefully we can build more context as we go. Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst | 10 ++++++++++ 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) diff --git a/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst b/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst index d14007081595..1fa5ab8754d3 100644 --- a/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst +++ b/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst @@ -319,3 +319,13 @@ unpatched tree to confirm infrastructure didn't mangle it. Finally, go back and read :ref:`Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst <submittingpatches>` to be sure you are not repeating some common mistake documented there. + +My company uses peer feedback in employee performance reviews. Can I ask netdev maintainers for feedback? +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- + +Yes, especially if you spend significant amount of time reviewing code +and go out of your way to improve shared infrastructure. + +The feedback must be requested by you, the contributor, and will always +be shared with you (even if you request for it to be submitted to your +manager). -- 2.37.3
