Re: Brainstorm: Developers should get karma based on the relevance of their software
 

Original code should count for more IMHO, but even straight ports should get something for the packaging and maintenance effort.

I think the "author" field comes from the Maintainer: field in debian/control, and unfortunately there's no such distinction in the Debian spec :-(

Another problem is that the distinction is not always clear-cut. We have straight ports (eg most command line tools) and completely original maemo-specific apps at the two extremes, but also ports with lots of maemo-specific changes inbetween, sometimes with the "porter" being the same as the "author" (eg claws-mail) and sometimes a different person (eg xournal or pidgin).

A library wouldn't even appear there in the first place. Maybe package maintainers could get an additional x points for each package that depends on one of theirs?

I agree, and this should also apply to other karma-based rewards like summit sponsorship.

(Thanks for an excellent post btw)

Re: Brainstorm: Developers should get karma based on the relevance of their software
 

Additionally, we might utilize commit counts from Ohloh (see for example MaemoPlazer) to figure out how much each developer is contributing to the project.

Re: Brainstorm: Developers should get karma based on the relevance of their software
 

For karma and ohloh see https://bugs.maemo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5012

This shows that we should move good ideas from bugzilla and talk to brainstorm...

btw Henri, can you have a look to the permissions? People posting ideas can't edit them https://bugs.maemo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5133

Re: Brainstorm: Developers should get karma based on the relevance of their software
 

Commit count is a very unreliable stat (as people have different (D)VCS usage patterns), and quite often newcomers or non-regular contributors just send patches to core developers, who then apply them to trunk.

I would also join the request of those who would like to see a karma multiplier based on just how Maemo a project is, say along the lines of 'straight port', 'localized Maemo application' (for something properly hildonized, etc), 'designed for Maemo' (for something written exclusively or primarily for Maemo).

Re: Brainstorm: Developers should get karma based on the relevance of their software
 

How's that so? If a small, rewarding karma system was in place during the active Canola development days, iNdT should have gotten so much karma now -- and they deserved it. They asked for feedback for each version and they got pages and pages of comments, suggestions, and bug reports. This in turn resulted to significant improvements to the app.

No one wants development to stop, and we both agree that there should be a development karma system of some sort. What I guess we don't agree on is what the karma is for. I look at it as a reward for developers for making good apps and continuously improving them thru end-users' feedback. If you look at it at the 'competitiveness' point of view, well, that is something I didn't think about nor want to go in to.

Re: Brainstorm: Developers should get karma based on the relevance of their software
 

I agree with Reggie. I don't want to see developers rewarded for competing with each other as much as I want them competing with themselves (ie, continuously taking feedback and putting it into the best work they can do, etc).

In the broader sense, I would prefer developers be rewarded for collaborating with each other. Now-- the challenge is to measure THAT.

Ooo... that's a start...

Re: Brainstorm: Developers should get karma based on the relevance of their software
 

Ohloh does analyze more than just numbers of commits. They look at lines of code, comment % etc. The "Contributor Fact" API is quite interesting.

As for non-regular contributors not getting credited, that depends entirely on the culture and tools of the project. Git (that is anyway available on Garage) makes it quite easy to credit even people just sending simple patches.

I'm not saying this should be the only (or even the main) source of karma from applications, but it would be a nice addition to the formula.

Re: Brainstorm: Developers should get karma based on the relevance of their software
 

That's why I oppose hints like 'top x karma developers/holders will get into the discount program' - that's a direct call for a karma race.

Yes, I'm familiar with Ohloh metrics (been an Ohloh member myself for some time now), I'm just saying that it's a very rough indicator - lines of code and amount of changes say nothing about the genius contained within that code.

Re: Brainstorm: Developers should get karma based on the relevance of their software
 

Genius contained within the code should probably be apparent from other factors in the karma count - app downloads, ratings and so forth.

Re: Brainstorm: Developers should get karma based on the relevance of their software
 

Absolutely, which brings us back to arguments that this should (must?) be a mixed metric.

Re: Brainstorm: Developers should get karma based on the relevance of their software
 

Time to start getting conclusions.

I was actually thinking to send the link of the Brainstorm proposal and this thread to the maemo.org contributors that got a device discount last week. If a consensus doesn't come alone, then propose that someone from the Council would take the action of coming up with a decision during the November sprint.

Re: Brainstorm: Developers should get karma based on the relevance of their software
 

Traffic on various threads show there are too many corner cases to come up with a solution that is better than the current one. Better in the sense that it provides developers of useful programs with a test device.

Is it possible to allow the community to thumb up on the entries in the Fremantle_Developer_Device_Queue?

Re: Brainstorm: Developers should get karma based on the relevance of their software
 

You could Brainstorm for that. :)

Re: Brainstorm: Developers should get karma based on the relevance of their software
 

I think it's a good idea, at least we can get more opinions/POV.

Re: Brainstorm: Developers should get karma based on the relevance of their software
 

... but then I thought why bothering. :) If someone cares so much about karma and is so unhappy about the current way of handling it, he or she would be here active helping to get a solution. If you need to chase people is because they are not unhappy (one could say).

I have put this in the queue of the maemo.org development process: http://wiki.maemo.org/Maemo.org_prop...ew_.26_Renewed

Re: [Under consideration] Developers should get karma based on the relevance of their software
 

I am afraid I have to say that I don't trust popularity contests. They are based on the false premise that popularity (what can be measured) truly correlates with quality (what people really want to use).

Couple points:

• What happens if application, although quite solution, is still the only mean to accomplish the something? Giving points and encouraging route towards road to nowhere surely can't be the correct thing to do!
• Even if there were nearly perfect applications many people would use and thus probably vote (knowingly or nonknowingly) even the worse ones due information asymmetry.
• The raw data lacks points for reasoning that could support strategic decision making. If proper marketing study would have to be made anyways why not then start with it and stop messing with the whole argumentum ad populum mess?

Tbh the setting of the original question in this thread and in brainstorm sets dangerous agenda. Liked probably because people instrisicly love being part of decision making process but misleading nevertheless. Experts are still experts. Dig that word "expert" from some better dictionary and ponder about that - I urge you all!

Re: [Under consideration] Developers should get karma based on the relevance of their software
 

Let's take a step back and look at the bigger picture. Karma is not an 'excellence in engineering' award, nor is it a voting mechanism. Also, what you are suggesting is even more dangerous - someone 'higher up' classifying apps into 'worse' and 'near perfect' is basically a call to halt all innovation. Let developers scratch their itches the way the want to (within platform recommendations), and let people say what they think of those scratchers (+help improve them). As easy as that.

Re: [Under consideration] Developers should get karma based on the relevance of their software
 

Karma based on measured software updates is a good metric because it is best measure of.

1) Userbase that actually wants to use the s/w
2) Development activity

Number two could be 'abused' by developers releasing many small updates. But even that is not such a bad thing.

Re: [Under consideration] Developers should get karma based on the relevance of their software
 

I believe some of the downsides will end up being self-correcting anyway.

Re: [Under consideration] Developers should get karma based on the relevance of their software
 

There seems to be quite many votes already. Any plans to actually implement this in the near future? :)

Re: [Under consideration] Developers should get karma based on the relevance of their software
 

We're discussing the proposed changes at the moment: http://n2.nabble.com/Sprint-task-Ref....html#a4293910