On Sat, Dec 28, 2019 at 02:35:50PM +0000, Sean Whitton wrote: > On Sat 28 Dec 2019 at 08:21am -05, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: > > > Oh, wow. I've been doing this wrong all along. I am not sure how I > > developed the impression that it was necessary to distinguish different > > copyright holders (even same copyright holders with different copyright > > years), but your approach is most certainly simpler and more compact. > > Right. This is the sort of overdocumentation that I worry our > machine-readable copyright format implicitly encourages us to do. I see similar things on nm.debian.org, which I ended up calling in my head something like "the law of inflation of bureaucracy". That is, I see that when people are asked to do some work, that later will be checked by someone else, over time there is a tendency for the perceived amount of work to inflate. I guess the incentives are such that doing one bit less feels like making it more likely that review will fail, and doing one bit more feels like making it more likely that review will pass. The result over time is an increase in the amount effort that both people who are doing the work and people who are doing the checking end up putting into the system. For example, an Application Manager in the NM process will tend to err for asking a question more, that DAM will have to read. I haven't yet seen easy ways of introducing a feedback mechanism to counter this: saying "you didn't need to do this" feels to me like arbitrarily undervaluing someone's work, and maybe the person really found it important to do it. I would be very much interested in reasoning about this. Enrico -- GPG key: 4096R/634F4BD1E7AD5568 2009-05-08 Enrico Zini <enrico@enricozini.org>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature