Difference between revisions of "Karma For Continuous Integration"

From CitconWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
(New page: Karma for CI, by Squirrel Squirrel, Jason, Ronald, Frederik, Joel, Luc, Rija, Martijn, Pierre-Emmanuel, Dario, Tero, Raumo, Marko, Marc-Andre, Wolf, Roshan, David Z, Alexander, Ulrich, Ro...)
 
 
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
 
Squirrel, Jason, Ronald, Frederik, Joel, Luc, Rija, Martijn, Pierre-Emmanuel, Dario, Tero, Raumo, Marko, Marc-Andre, Wolf, Roshan, David Z, Alexander, Ulrich, Robert, Cirilo, Marc
 
Squirrel, Jason, Ronald, Frederik, Joel, Luc, Rija, Martijn, Pierre-Emmanuel, Dario, Tero, Raumo, Marko, Marc-Andre, Wolf, Roshan, David Z, Alexander, Ulrich, Robert, Cirilo, Marc
  
Pb at youDevise: the code was written by self-talk developers. They want to encourage people to write better code, without forcing them.
+
Problem at youDevise: the code was written by self-taught developers. They want to encourage people to write better code, without forcing them.
 
They want to measure quality with some value.
 
They want to measure quality with some value.
  
Line 20: Line 20:
  
 
Martijn: maybe the teams could select the metrics that are being tracked.
 
Martijn: maybe the teams could select the metrics that are being tracked.
 +
 +
[Squirrel takes over at this point - didn't note names!]
 +
 +
Or maybe karma could wear off or decay over time, so particular developers don't get a large amount.
 +
 +
Another idea: provide a message at commit time, telling the developer how he or she did on various measures.
 +
 +
It's hard to measure refactoring quality, which is one of the most important factors; in fact sometimes when doing tricky refactoring you intentionally (and temporarily!) incur technical debt.
 +
 +
Yet another idea: if karma to be measured, should change the components and the weighting over time, perhaps reviewing at each retrospective.
 +
 +
One last idea: someone could sacrifice karma to the team.

Latest revision as of 14:55, 11 November 2007

Karma for CI, by Squirrel

Squirrel, Jason, Ronald, Frederik, Joel, Luc, Rija, Martijn, Pierre-Emmanuel, Dario, Tero, Raumo, Marko, Marc-Andre, Wolf, Roshan, David Z, Alexander, Ulrich, Robert, Cirilo, Marc

Problem at youDevise: the code was written by self-taught developers. They want to encourage people to write better code, without forcing them. They want to measure quality with some value.

Their solution: a tool where karma points are given when good things are done. BUT there is no tangible reward: no bonus, no salary increase, no assessment. The question asked to the attendants is: do you think it is worth building such a tool?

Alexander: this sounds like a fix for a situation he saw where bonuses were given depending on the number of lines.

Jason: our developers have became better. We now want to help them get better without training wheels.

Ulrich: this might be against collective code ownership. Also, it could be used negatively for people to compete against each other. Squirrel: yes, that might work only when there is a good atmosphere in the team.

Maybe just karma per team, not per developer.

Martijn: maybe the teams could select the metrics that are being tracked.

[Squirrel takes over at this point - didn't note names!]

Or maybe karma could wear off or decay over time, so particular developers don't get a large amount.

Another idea: provide a message at commit time, telling the developer how he or she did on various measures.

It's hard to measure refactoring quality, which is one of the most important factors; in fact sometimes when doing tricky refactoring you intentionally (and temporarily!) incur technical debt.

Yet another idea: if karma to be measured, should change the components and the weighting over time, perhaps reviewing at each retrospective.

One last idea: someone could sacrifice karma to the team.