What I remember reading on Twitter at the time, was that devs were expected to print out about fifty pages of diffs relevant to the last six months of their work. Rather than printing out all changes from the last month.
The printout part makes me question the idea that code was being counted. That part is easy to do with tools which Twitter undoubtedly has.
I've never worked a job where I couldn't print out 50 pages of diffs for six months, although I have the sort of temperament where I'd probably sandbag or quit if asked to.
There's little point in speculating on this until a clear picture emerges. I can't imagine a winnowing process for a new takeover that didn't involve some kind of portfolio justifying the worker's salary. Not at Twitter, which was notoriously overstaffed and had a reputation for rest-and-vest.
> Has there been any definitive reporting on this?
I'm not aware of any such reporting, just rumours.
But it seems obvious that since they scrapped together this list in just a single week, they can't have done anything much more complex than use some simple metrics.
What I remember reading on Twitter at the time, was that devs were expected to print out about fifty pages of diffs relevant to the last six months of their work. Rather than printing out all changes from the last month.
The printout part makes me question the idea that code was being counted. That part is easy to do with tools which Twitter undoubtedly has.
I've never worked a job where I couldn't print out 50 pages of diffs for six months, although I have the sort of temperament where I'd probably sandbag or quit if asked to.
There's little point in speculating on this until a clear picture emerges. I can't imagine a winnowing process for a new takeover that didn't involve some kind of portfolio justifying the worker's salary. Not at Twitter, which was notoriously overstaffed and had a reputation for rest-and-vest.