On Mon, 14 Apr 2008, Al Viro wrote:There is currently little incentive for developers to perform review. It's difficult work, and is generally not rewarded or recognized, except in often quite negative ways. There is a small handful of people who do a lot of review, but they are exceptional in various ways. OTOH, writing code is relatively simple, and is much more highly rewarded: - People tend to get paid to write kernel code, but not so much to review it. - Things like "who made the kernel" statistics and related articles ignore code review. - Creating new features is perceived as the highest form of contribution for general developers, and likely important as career currency (similar to the publish or perish model in the academic world). I don't know how to solve this, but suspect that encouraging the use of reviewed-by and also including it in things like analysis of who is contributing, selection for kernel summit invitations etc. would be a start. At least, better than nothing. - James -- James Morris <jmorris@namei.org> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
| Avi Kivity | [PATCH 09/58] KVM: MMU: Respect nonpae pagetable quadrant when zapping ptes |
| Andrew Morton | 2.6.25-rc2-mm1 |
| James Morris | Re: LSM conversion to static interface |
| Eric W. Biederman | Re: [PATCH] kexec: force x86_64 arches to boot kdump kernels on boot cpu |
git: | |
| David Miller | Re: 2.6.25-rc8: FTP transfer errors |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| David Miller | Re: [GIT *] Solos PCI ADSL card update |
| David Miller | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
