4 ms·

As someone on the hiring side, Github projects only matter when they show impact via serious industry adoption (this is not sufficient, leftPad won't get you hi

As someone on the hiring side, Github projects only matter when they show impact via serious industry adoption (this is not sufficient, leftPad won't get you hired). The problem is that a Github repo is too much time an effort to evaluate on technical merits. And even if the work is good, how fast can you do it? Some people turn out good work at 1/3 the rate their peers, I don't want to hire them. Between other parts of the evaluation I can give the repo 30-60 minutes max, just not enough time.

scarface_74 3y ago
If I were looking at a Github portfolio, I would be more concerned about reading their documentation. I want to know about their communication skills and why they think their code matters. What problem were they trying to solve? Even if it was to scratch an itch that they had and only three people including themselves ever use it. What was their motivation for doing it?
- Hermitian909 3y ago
  I find the signal from this is still too low for it to be worth looking into. Quality of documentation has a lot to do with: 1. Correctness 2. Matching the content to the intended audience I find that in general I have no time to check correctness, nor is it obvious who the intended audience is. A blurb and basic setup instructions is fine if the intended audience is the author. A tool intended for a particular set of power users may not require motivation. The author may well know how to write more accessible documentation and chose not to for a sensible reason.
  - scarface_74 3y ago
    I am more concerned about #2 than number one. I want to know how well they communicate. But then again, I’m highly biased toward communication skills. It’s almost impossible to be a force multiplier without them.
    - Hermitian909 3y ago
      I think we have similar priorities, I just find github to be an extremely poor predictor of on-the-job communication.

scarface_74 3y ago

If I were looking at a Github portfolio, I would be more concerned about reading their documentation. I want to know about their communication skills and why they think their code matters. What problem were they trying to solve? Even if it was to scratch an itch that they had and only three people including themselves ever use it. What was their motivation for doing it?

Hermitian909 3y ago
I find the signal from this is still too low for it to be worth looking into. Quality of documentation has a lot to do with: 1. Correctness 2. Matching the content to the intended audience I find that in general I have no time to check correctness, nor is it obvious who the intended audience is. A blurb and basic setup instructions is fine if the intended audience is the author. A tool intended for a particular set of power users may not require motivation. The author may well know how to write more accessible documentation and chose not to for a sensible reason.
- scarface_74 3y ago
  I am more concerned about #2 than number one. I want to know how well they communicate. But then again, I’m highly biased toward communication skills. It’s almost impossible to be a force multiplier without them.
  - Hermitian909 3y ago
    I think we have similar priorities, I just find github to be an extremely poor predictor of on-the-job communication.