4 ms·

Here is my take on hiring: an active Git repository with a decent amount of non-trivial code/projects generally gets applicants I have to evaluate to skip the w

Here is my take on hiring: an active Git repository with a decent amount of non-trivial code/projects generally gets applicants I have to evaluate to skip the whiteboard interview and instead grab lunch or coffee with me. We then discuss technology/software engineering. I find this approach to have yielded much more conclusive results, though it probably would not "scale" well. You can quickly tell whether someone is passionate and resourceful by talking with them, occasionally erring on research-ish stuff but always focusing on the implementation rather than the theory. Plus I sometimes stumble on the occasional gem that is very knowledgeable and from whom I can learn. Whiteboard interviews, coding challenges, take-home projects. All of those things are so time-consuming for both the company, the interviewer and, of course, the applicant. And all of that just in the hope that the company will accept them... maybe? Of course when nothing else is available then it is the usual drill: phone, skype, on-site 1, on-site 2. But if other signals are available then to the trash it goes.

mancerayder 10y ago
If you start with github repositories for your candidates, aren't you filtering out people who do things other than work? Most of us work 40 to 60 hours a week, and sign paperwork that says that any code we write belongs to the company. But now we need to work Saturday and Sunday on open source projects so we're worthy of sharing a coffee with a hiring manager?
- sqeaky 10y ago
  > says that any code we write belongs to the company. I have turned down several jobs when they tried to hit me with that clause. I have negotiated a better clause that gave them the work I made for them, which just happens to line up with state law here > But now we need to work Saturday and Sunday on open source projects so we're worthy of sharing a coffee with a hiring manager? I wouldn't want to hire someone who didn't enjoy coding enough that they didn't have something on publicly visible repo.
  - mancerayder 10y ago
    I wouldn't want to hire someone who didn't enjoy coding enough that they didn't have something on publicly visible repo. Shudder. Sounds like one chooses to work for you, or have a healthy life that involves non-coding/computer hobbies and relationships. Maybe it's a good filter for us in the opposite direction.
  - lj3 10y ago
    > I wouldn't want to hire someone who didn't enjoy coding enough that they didn't have something on publicly visible repo. Why? Those people sound like terrible employees. Those are the people who come into work to punch the clock and get paid while saving their energy and creativity for their side projects, which is what they'd really rather be working on.
    - jghn 10y ago
      Most of my coding output for my job ends up on a public github repo, which is the best of both worlds.
      - lj3 10y ago
        That would be nice. Are you a library or framework developer?
        jghn 10y ago
        I work for a nonprofit. The downside is the pay isn't as great as it could be elsewhere. The upside is that the work is meaningful and I get to write OSS as part of my day job.
    - sqeaky 10y ago
      I worded my comment poorly, I had double negatives, or something. I would prefer to hire people with publicly visible code.
      - 10y ago
- AvenueIngres 10y ago
  I am not filtering anyone. I use the signals that are available to me and which I can proof-check. Candidates who don't have public software forges (whether it is self-hosted Git, Gitlab, Github, or Bitbucket etc.) go through the usual (tedious) interview cycle. Those who have don't because that would be redundant and a waste of time. This is simple.
  - throw_away_777 10y ago
    You definitely are filtering people, unless you accept everyone who goes through the usual (tedious) interview process. This interview process is quite noisy, so being able to skip it gives a clear advantage. Whether or not this is a good thing is another question, but don't claim you aren't discriminating against people who don't code in their free time.
    - AvenueIngres 10y ago
      This is a hard problem to which there are no easy solutions, only trade-offs to be made. Here I think that I strike a reasonable middle-ground providing I act in good faith.
      - lj3 10y ago
        If this was an easy problem to solve, there wouldn't be a post on the HN front page about it every single week.
bmj 10y ago
Question for you: is your judgement of the applicant affected by whether or not they have an active GitHub repo?
- AvenueIngres 10y ago
  Do you mean does it matter what version controlling tool they use or if they self-host? or if I would favour a candidate over another because of an active Github repository?
  - bmj 10y ago
    The latter. Are you pre-judging a candidate because you can look at an open source repo instead of spending your day trudging through a tech interview?
    - AvenueIngres 10y ago
      Mmh possibly, there might be a slight bias favoring them. The shorter the recruitment lifecycle and the quicker I can go back work on actual software engineering. But then again, I hire lots of software engineers who have 0 OSS contributions but a shit-ton of industry experience. It does not matter if your last contribution was 4 years ago by the way. I am not looking for a full green activity graph (though it demonstrates consistency and discipline which are good) but rather for non-trivial, significant and well-crafted pieces of software so I can rest easy. I don't go in trying to shoot down candidates. That's what whiteboard interviews are for. (:
jghn 10y ago
Do you just look at their own projects or their public activity in general? I have a lot of the latter but very little of the former and the stuff I do have in the former category isn't particularly flattering.
Lich 10y ago
What do you consider to be non-trivial? Seems subjective. Exaggerating here, but obviously a git hub project that runs fusion reactor software is certainly non-trivial, but what about a small project that does/looks simple, but really takes a fair amount of effort to make it work? Like a triple AAA game is non-trivial compared to a breakout clone, but a breakout clone is still somewhat non-trivial (graphics, sound, "simulated" physics, GUI, gameplay logic etc.).

mancerayder 10y ago

If you start with github repositories for your candidates, aren't you filtering out people who do things other than work? Most of us work 40 to 60 hours a week, and sign paperwork that says that any code we write belongs to the company. But now we need to work Saturday and Sunday on open source projects so we're worthy of sharing a coffee with a hiring manager?

sqeaky 10y ago
> says that any code we write belongs to the company. I have turned down several jobs when they tried to hit me with that clause. I have negotiated a better clause that gave them the work I made for them, which just happens to line up with state law here > But now we need to work Saturday and Sunday on open source projects so we're worthy of sharing a coffee with a hiring manager? I wouldn't want to hire someone who didn't enjoy coding enough that they didn't have something on publicly visible repo.
- mancerayder 10y ago
  I wouldn't want to hire someone who didn't enjoy coding enough that they didn't have something on publicly visible repo. Shudder. Sounds like one chooses to work for you, or have a healthy life that involves non-coding/computer hobbies and relationships. Maybe it's a good filter for us in the opposite direction.
- lj3 10y ago
  > I wouldn't want to hire someone who didn't enjoy coding enough that they didn't have something on publicly visible repo. Why? Those people sound like terrible employees. Those are the people who come into work to punch the clock and get paid while saving their energy and creativity for their side projects, which is what they'd really rather be working on.
  - jghn 10y ago
    Most of my coding output for my job ends up on a public github repo, which is the best of both worlds.
    - lj3 10y ago
      That would be nice. Are you a library or framework developer?
      - jghn 10y ago
        I work for a nonprofit. The downside is the pay isn't as great as it could be elsewhere. The upside is that the work is meaningful and I get to write OSS as part of my day job.
  - sqeaky 10y ago
    I worded my comment poorly, I had double negatives, or something. I would prefer to hire people with publicly visible code.
    - 10y ago
AvenueIngres 10y ago
I am not filtering anyone. I use the signals that are available to me and which I can proof-check. Candidates who don't have public software forges (whether it is self-hosted Git, Gitlab, Github, or Bitbucket etc.) go through the usual (tedious) interview cycle. Those who have don't because that would be redundant and a waste of time. This is simple.
- throw_away_777 10y ago
  You definitely are filtering people, unless you accept everyone who goes through the usual (tedious) interview process. This interview process is quite noisy, so being able to skip it gives a clear advantage. Whether or not this is a good thing is another question, but don't claim you aren't discriminating against people who don't code in their free time.
  - AvenueIngres 10y ago
    This is a hard problem to which there are no easy solutions, only trade-offs to be made. Here I think that I strike a reasonable middle-ground providing I act in good faith.
    - lj3 10y ago
      If this was an easy problem to solve, there wouldn't be a post on the HN front page about it every single week.

bmj 10y ago

Question for you: is your judgement of the applicant affected by whether or not they have an active GitHub repo?

AvenueIngres 10y ago
Do you mean does it matter what version controlling tool they use or if they self-host? or if I would favour a candidate over another because of an active Github repository?
- bmj 10y ago
  The latter. Are you pre-judging a candidate because you can look at an open source repo instead of spending your day trudging through a tech interview?
  - AvenueIngres 10y ago
    Mmh possibly, there might be a slight bias favoring them. The shorter the recruitment lifecycle and the quicker I can go back work on actual software engineering. But then again, I hire lots of software engineers who have 0 OSS contributions but a shit-ton of industry experience. It does not matter if your last contribution was 4 years ago by the way. I am not looking for a full green activity graph (though it demonstrates consistency and discipline which are good) but rather for non-trivial, significant and well-crafted pieces of software so I can rest easy. I don't go in trying to shoot down candidates. That's what whiteboard interviews are for. (:

jghn 10y ago

Do you just look at their own projects or their public activity in general? I have a lot of the latter but very little of the former and the stuff I do have in the former category isn't particularly flattering.

Lich 10y ago

What do you consider to be non-trivial? Seems subjective. Exaggerating here, but obviously a git hub project that runs fusion reactor software is certainly non-trivial, but what about a small project that does/looks simple, but really takes a fair amount of effort to make it work? Like a triple AAA game is non-trivial compared to a breakout clone, but a breakout clone is still somewhat non-trivial (graphics, sound, "simulated" physics, GUI, gameplay logic etc.).