[irateswami]

> Simple metrics like LoC, story points and number of commits are lazy ways to evaluate developers.

I mean, looking through the git logs means you look at code contributions. If you're a software engineer, that's kind of, ya know, your entire jobs. You can get a lot from looking at someone's contributions, especially in code or documentation or slack responses. Volume doesn't mean shit though, that's the trick.

> Might as well replace managers with a bot.

Yes, please.

[sdesol]

> Volume doesn't mean shit though, that's the trick.

Based on having studied lots and lots of open source projects, I can say volume has a very strong correlation with experience. The more people contribute, the more likely they have been contributing for a long time. A novice contributing a lot to me, can be a sign they are extremely good or they are trying to game the system or they don't know what they are doing and are constantly fixing previous mistakes.

[8note]

My git logs don't represent all the code I didn't write. Solving a problem doesn't necessitate me writing the code, or even having code written at all.

[blurker]

Yes exactly. A really good manager will recognize this and will not rely on simple heuristics to value people.