Speaking of that, why not institute a "program committee"
where people volunteer to do reviews before your Sage days?
I do a lot of program committee work, which is painful but
is a professional "giving back to the community" task. It
is always done against a deadline which is a great motivation.
Tim Daly
Jason Grout wrote:
On 04/14/2010 03:04 PM, William Stein wrote:
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:43 PM, John
Cremona<john.crem...@gmail.com> wrote:
I have been strongly encouraging new students starting out with Sage
to make small (initially) patches on their very own ticket, so that
they can feel good when these get reviewed positively and then merged.
But those same people might take quite a while longer before they
feel confident about reviewing others people's tickets.
It's usually a long time after one has started submitting papers for
publication that one starts to get requests for refereeing other
papers -- not that long, but a while. Isn't that similar?
Yes. The main intent of what I'm suggesting is that people who are
contributing a *lot* of code, but not doing any reviewing, will be
very, very strongly encouraged to do more reviewing.
Maybe a more balanced system would address the concerns. You get a
little karma for posting a patch, a little more karma for posting a
patch on a ticket with someone else's patch (because you're probably
sort of reviewing their code as you make your patch), and a lot more
karma for reviewing a ticket. You'd get a "first-time bonus" karma
for posting your first patch.
Of course, this also might make it more complicated than it is worth.
Jason
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URL: http://www.sagemath.org
To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.
