[MichaelSalib]

Which do you think looks better on your promotion packet?

1. Write a new libc and get it used all over Google, generating lots of users automatically; or

2. Shepard Google's adoption of code some other folks wrote.

[DannyBee]

I don't think this level of cynicism is warranted

However, as the person who actually runs the relevant promo committees for the org, both would be fine, i'd care a lot more about why the choice was made.

[izacus]

I love how your repose with 1st hand experience is downvoted as opposed to a pointless jab of the original poster :)

[finnthehuman]

Googlers have the experience but not the distance to meaningfully comment on google.

[DannyBee]

Sorry, but this is just BS through and through.

Painting 100k people with a brush of "can't be objective" based on no data is probably the most biased think i've actually seen in a long time.

[finnthehuman]

I’ll paint 7 billion with the “proximity changes perception” brush.

[izacus]

> Googlers have the experience but not the distance to meaningfully comment on google.

Yes, having experience is still better than outright making things up because you have neither the experience, nor data or any kind of basis for a claim.

[chandlerc1024]

Either one looks completely fantastic, I assure you.

I have helped people on my team write promotion packets in both forms. Both worked perfectly well.

[netheril96]

Option 1 will take a long time. Writing a libc takes a long time, and transitioning the whole of Google codebase to a new libc takes even longer to iron out all of the incompatibilities.

If one goes with option 2, he/she may have many more achievements to write on his/her promotion packet during the time he/she would have spent implementing a new libc. So I hardly think promotion is the incentive here.