1 |
On 05/04/2010 17:07, Jon Portnoy wrote: |
2 |
> On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 08:50:49AM +0300, Eray Aslan wrote: |
3 |
>> Just replying randomly. |
4 |
>> |
5 |
>> On 05.04.2010 04:33, Tobias Heinlein wrote: |
6 |
>>> I think this is a good starting point to get rid of the "some important |
7 |
>>> questions are too hard to answer" dilemma that can be implemented |
8 |
>>> relatively fast. On top of that I like Sebastian's idea to order the |
9 |
>>> quizzes by difficulty -- this means just ordering by the categories I |
10 |
>>> just mentioned would be sufficient: 1 first, then 2, then 3. |
11 |
>> |
12 |
>> I am not against this idea but frankly, I do not understand what is so |
13 |
>> demotivating about the ebuild quiz. If you get demotivated because of a |
14 |
>> single exam, perhaps the problem is with the motivation and not with the |
15 |
>> exam itself. I took the published quiz just for the fun of it and to |
16 |
>> see where I missed. It is not that long. |
17 |
>> |
18 |
> |
19 |
> Agreed... |
20 |
> |
21 |
> I've been following this discussion with mixed feelings. When we |
22 |
> originally began using the quiz system the idea was simply to try |
23 |
> to force new developers to RTFM -- and I was not such a fan of the |
24 |
> entire concept (as I recall, the quizzes were a "suggestion" from Daniel). |
25 |
> |
26 |
> As it turns out, the quiz system has repeatedly proven itself useful |
27 |
> in another way: developers who whine/bitch/moan and are hesitant to |
28 |
> even attempt to complete the quizzes often turn out to be bitchy, |
29 |
> unmotivated, or unpleasant developers. I don't want to name any names, |
30 |
> but I've seen this often. |
31 |
> |
32 |
> IMO, those "boring" "too much like high school" quizzes serve one |
33 |
> extremely valuable function: finding out up front who's a team player |
34 |
> (or at least willing to do something mildly unpleasant for the |
35 |
> Greater Good) |
36 |
> |
37 |
> If that's causing potential devs to drop out... perhaps the system is |
38 |
> working as it should? :) |
39 |
> |
40 |
That assumes the system is working perfectly and the whole fact that we |
41 |
are having this discussion would go against that. |
42 |
|
43 |
From what i've read in the community, lots of people would have no |
44 |
problems helping out maintaining packages, they just don't want the |
45 |
baggage that comes with it. |
46 |
|
47 |
You could say they're lazy or they're not the "type of developers you |
48 |
want" but at the end of the day they're just different developers, most |
49 |
of whom probably just want to make sure the packages they like are in |
50 |
the tree and updated. |