* Re: [...] an apology, and a maintainership note
2018-09-16 19:22 Linux 4.19-rc4 released, an apology, and a maintainership note Linus Torvalds
@ 2018-09-16 21:42 ` Adam Borowski
2018-09-16 23:59 ` Moritz Obermeier
2018-09-17 0:18 ` Linux 4.19-rc4 released, " Rene Herman
` (8 subsequent siblings)
9 siblings, 1 reply; 24+ messages in thread
From: Adam Borowski @ 2018-09-16 21:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Torvalds; +Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List
On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 12:22:43PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> This is my reality. I am not an emotionally empathetic kind of person
> and that probably doesn't come as a big surprise to anybody. Least of
> all me. The fact that I then misread people and don't realize (for
> years) how badly I've judged a situation and contributed to an
> unprofessional environment is not good.
>
> This week people in our community confronted me about my lifetime of
> not understanding emotions. My flippant attacks in emails have been
> both unprofessional and uncalled for. Especially at times when I made
> it personal. In my quest for a better patch, this made sense to me.
> I know now this was not OK and I am truly sorry.
>
> The above is basically a long-winded way to get to the somewhat
> painful personal admission that hey, I need to change some of my
> behavior, and I want to apologize to the people that my personal
> behavior hurt and possibly drove away from kernel development
> entirely.
Despite me being just among bottom-rung popcorn of kernel contributors, let
me says this:
No. Just no. You're so successful because you're one of few people who
don't waste time beating around the bush. You call a spade a spade instead
of polite "professional" bullshit.
You often use rude words, but you don't do so without a reason. IMO your
most striking quality is not technical ability (pretty high...) but the
ratio of times you open your mouth to the times you're right. And even
if you're not right, you don't take offense at getting corrected and
immediately admit someone else was right.
Sure, there are cases when both choices are right, but your approach avoids
wasting time making a decision. For example: recently, you forced disabling
string truncation warnings despite many people feeling otherwise. I for one
believe GCC's warnings even though sounding bogus are good for eliminating
strncpy -- what I would have done would be giving it an aliased version
named "fixedfieldncpy" or such that disables the warning, and fixing the
whole rest. But what you did instead deprioritizes the issue: the kernel
doesn't work any worse than it did with gcc-7, thus there are indeed more
urgent matters elsewhere. So even if I don't fully agree with you, you are
the boss and as long as your version is acceptable, let's stick to it.
And, it's _you_ who has proven merit, not me.
> I am going to take time off and get some assistance on how to
> understand people’s emotions and respond appropriately.
>
> Put another way: When asked at conferences, I occasionally talk about
> how the pain-points in kernel development have generally not been
> about the _technical_ issues, but about the inflection points where
> development flow and behavior changed.
Too many projects get detracted by prolonged crap about social things, don't
let this pull you down. There's a problem when people _without merit_ are
rude -- those indeed need to get a spanking. A spanking not ADHD meds.
Short and to the point, letting them learn.
But you, you _earned_ the right to be rude to get your point across.
I watched a video about you getting shamed on a DebConf because of breaching
some "code of conduct" by using a naughty word. I didn't like that and
believe it was you who was right (I don't recall the details though).
> I've talked to Greg to ask him if he'd mind finishing up 4.19 for me, so
> that I can take a break, and try to at least fix my own behavior.
>
> This is not some kind of "I'm burnt out, I need to just go away"
> break. I'm not feeling like I don't want to continue maintaining
> Linux. Quite the reverse. I very much *do* want to continue to do
> this project that I've been working on for almost three decades.
>
> This is more like the time I got out of kernel development for a while
> because I needed to write a little tool called "git". I need to take
> a break to get help on how to behave differently and fix some issues
> in my tooling and workflow.
You do deserve a vacation. By all means, do take a break and let the
community rehearse for "Linus got mauled by a bear". But we want you back.
> And yes, some of it might be "just" tooling. Maybe I can get an email
> filter in place so at when I send email with curse-words, they just
> won't go out. Because hey, I'm a big believer in tools, and at least
> _some_ problems going forward might be improved with simple
> automation.
Please don't. When you use curse words, they're _warranted_. They're a
tool which, in my opinion, you don't overuse.
And it's fun to listen to a true master of words. An example: how many
pages would https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/2/2062 take to say politely yet get
the same effect?
> I know when I really look “myself in the mirror” it will be clear it's
> not the only change that has to happen, but hey... You can send me
> suggestions in email.
When you look yourself in the mirror, I want you to see that guy who codes
in a bathrobe instead of a sweet-talking lying politician. Being honest
means sometimes saying non-nice things.
Meow!
--
Don't be racist. White, amber or black, all beers should be judged based
solely on their merits. Heck, even if occasionally a cider applies for a
beer's job, why not?
On the other hand, mass-produced lager is not a race.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [...] an apology, and a maintainership note
2018-09-16 21:42 ` [...] " Adam Borowski
@ 2018-09-16 23:59 ` Moritz Obermeier
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Moritz Obermeier @ 2018-09-16 23:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
> When you look yourself in the mirror, I want you to see that guy who codes
> in a bathrobe instead of a sweet-talking lying politician.
This is why we need more empathy. There is no need for you to decide what
Linus sees once he looks into the mirror. You are projecting your own
thoughts and emotions onto him.
> Being honest means sometimes saying non-nice things.
Also I don't think being honest and being nice are mutually exclusive.
If someone does something in a bad way, it is actually nice to point that
out. But cursing is not really needed for this. In my experience cursing is
an indication that the mind is not calm, and therefore one is not making
the best possible decisions - which of course results in an not optimal
outcome.
@Linus: I think it is a very wise decision to take some time off for empathy
training. If your subconscious told you to avoid the summit, it is smart to
figure out where this comes from. I personally have found mindfulness
meditation to be a very helpful tool in becoming more empathetic, but I am
sure you are able to achieve your goal without my humble input. I admire
your work.
Kind Regards,
Moritz
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: Linux 4.19-rc4 released, an apology, and a maintainership note
2018-09-16 19:22 Linux 4.19-rc4 released, an apology, and a maintainership note Linus Torvalds
2018-09-16 21:42 ` [...] " Adam Borowski
@ 2018-09-17 0:18 ` Rene Herman
2018-09-17 0:20 ` [...] " Andy Isaacson
` (7 subsequent siblings)
9 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Rene Herman @ 2018-09-17 0:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: torvalds; +Cc: linux-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [...] an apology, and a maintainership note
2018-09-16 19:22 Linux 4.19-rc4 released, an apology, and a maintainership note Linus Torvalds
2018-09-16 21:42 ` [...] " Adam Borowski
2018-09-17 0:18 ` Linux 4.19-rc4 released, " Rene Herman
@ 2018-09-17 0:20 ` Andy Isaacson
2018-09-17 0:23 ` Linux 4.19-rc4 released, " Rene Herman
` (6 subsequent siblings)
9 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Andy Isaacson @ 2018-09-17 0:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Torvalds; +Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List
On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 12:22:43PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>This is where the "look yourself in the mirror" moment comes in.
>
>So here we are, me finally on the one hand realizing that it wasn't
>actually funny or a good sign that I was hoping to just skip the
>yearly kernel summit entirely, and on the other hand realizing that I
>really had been ignoring some fairly deep-seated feelings in the
>community.
>
>It's one thing when you can ignore these issues. Usually it’s just
>something I didn't want to deal with.
>
>This is my reality. I am not an emotionally empathetic kind of person
>and that probably doesn't come as a big surprise to anybody. Least of
>all me. The fact that I then misread people and don't realize (for
>years) how badly I've judged a situation and contributed to an
>unprofessional environment is not good.
>
>This week people in our community confronted me about my lifetime of
>not understanding emotions. My flippant attacks in emails have been
>both unprofessional and uncalled for. Especially at times when I made
>it personal. In my quest for a better patch, this made sense to me.
>I know now this was not OK and I am truly sorry.
>
>The above is basically a long-winded way to get to the somewhat
>painful personal admission that hey, I need to change some of my
>behavior, and I want to apologize to the people that my personal
>behavior hurt and possibly drove away from kernel development
>entirely.
>
>I am going to take time off and get some assistance on how to
>understand people’s emotions and respond appropriately.
Thank you for writing this, Linus. I have personal experience how
difficult it is to be honest, especially publicly, about difficult
topics and admitting one's own mistakes. You deserve huge kudos for the
journey you've already taken to write the above, and I look forward to
the improvements in the lkml culture that are certain to come as a
result.
The culture of lkml that came about in large part due to your behavior
that you alluded to above was a culture that I found amenable, and
absorbed, and replicated in other communities and relationships for many
years. It took a lot of soul searching and growth to realize for myself
that it wasn't healthy, fair, equitable, or amenable to folks from other
backgrounds, and to change my own behavior. A big part of that
realization and process was that I stepped away from the kernel
community completely. I'm still working on getting healthier around
this stuff, and that will be a lifelong process I'm sure.
If I can help in any way (for example, I have some suggested reading, I
can point to therapists and counselors who helped me, and I'm happy to
have in depth one on one or small group conversations about these
topics), please feel free to reach out. (That goes for others on lkml
as well, but I will be fairly guarded about engaging with folks who I
don't know or who I don't have confidence are engaging in good faith).
-andy
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: Linux 4.19-rc4 released, an apology, and a maintainership note
2018-09-16 19:22 Linux 4.19-rc4 released, an apology, and a maintainership note Linus Torvalds
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2018-09-17 0:20 ` [...] " Andy Isaacson
@ 2018-09-17 0:23 ` Rene Herman
2018-09-17 6:57 ` opal hart
` (5 subsequent siblings)
9 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Rene Herman @ 2018-09-17 0:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: torvalds; +Cc: linux-kernel
Hi Linus.
I was "around linux-kernel" some 10 years ago and still to this date
sometimes check e.g. lkml.org where I happened upon this; felt it hard
to resist commenting on one specific bit...
Whereas you concentrate on net-positive effect on code quality of an at
times "crass" communication style, I believe there is or used to be an
actually larger net-positive on community: the very fact that you as
project leader feel/felt free to sometimes tell people off is and is I
believe widely taken to be a sign that the Linux project leader still
considers himself part of the community; is anti-hierarchical in that
sense, and as such a large positive for a community a significant
majority of which would not have (had) it any other way.
Now, Linux has of course long outgrown its hacker-beginnings; I would
expect that by now an overwhelming majority of developers is part of
a corporate hierarchy anyway and therefore not themselves free to respond
to you "on equal terms" even if they were personally inclined to do so.
The above may hence be somewhat obsolete in reality -- and I'm also
sure that this is for you more personal than for someone like me reading
it on LKML(.org), but hearing you describe your style up to now as
_wrong_ still feels quite, well, wrong.
At the very least historically it wasn't, and it if is more now it
at the very least still reflects quite positively on honesty and
openness.
Rene.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: Linux 4.19-rc4 released, an apology, and a maintainership note
2018-09-16 19:22 Linux 4.19-rc4 released, an apology, and a maintainership note Linus Torvalds
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2018-09-17 0:23 ` Linux 4.19-rc4 released, " Rene Herman
@ 2018-09-17 6:57 ` opal hart
2018-09-17 7:57 ` […] " Martin Steigerwald
` (4 subsequent siblings)
9 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: opal hart @ 2018-09-17 6:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: torvalds; +Cc: linux-kernel
The new kernel rc release is good news as always. The rest of this? not
so much.
"I can’t wait for the mass exodus from Linux now that it’s been
infiltrated by SJWs. Hahahah" -- @CoralineAda on Twitter [1][2]
You really want people like this attempting to sabotage FOSS projects?
I for one am not discontinuing usage of Linux over any political BS,
and I believe it is foolish for anyone to leave any software project
over politics, but that does not mean I welcome political agendas in
software development.
Your old Code of Conflict was perfect and succinct. If someone cannot
use their head to figure out what is right or wrong to say in a mailing
list or a commit message, that person is unfit for contributing to
software in general. This doesn't need to be spelled out for anyone. We
didn't need to explicitly bar discriminatory speech from software
discussion, because software discussion was never the place to have
discrimination against people -- it only allows for discrimination
against shitty code. You, Linus, have never attacked anyone from what I
have seen; you have only attacked poorly-decided actions, which is
perfectly justified. People who really want to contribute to Linux dust
their shoulders off, take your criticism, and figure out how to
re-approach you depending on what they did that was not to your taste.
Anyone who shies away from criticism is IMO unfit to contribute in the
first place. I mean, yes, there are ways to get your criticisms across
in a more "constructive" tone, but this does not call for any code of
conduct. Maybe you do need to take time to figure out how you want to
approach the community, but don't take it that you *have* to do
anything. You don't have to do a thing. People will still use Linux
regardless. People who care about Linux will continue to contribute to
it, because they do not take your words personally (nor should they).
This Code of Conduct trend is nothing but a concern-trolling campaign
that people carry out in order to gain control over projects,
organisations, and communities. Everyone is best off if we do not give
these people the control they desire. Take their demands with a grain
of salt: they suggest a boilerplate Code of Conduct, you decide which
parts from which Linux can benefit, if any.
[1] https://twitter.com/CoralineAda/status/1041441155874009093
[2] http://archive.is/1iGmk
This is just another two cents from a fellow faceless transgender woman
on the Internet, yours truly,
--
wowaname <https://wowana.me/pgp>
Please use detailed subject lines and reply below quoted text
whenever possible.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: […] an apology, and a maintainership note
2018-09-16 19:22 Linux 4.19-rc4 released, an apology, and a maintainership note Linus Torvalds
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2018-09-17 6:57 ` opal hart
@ 2018-09-17 7:57 ` Martin Steigerwald
2018-09-17 8:53 ` Martin Steigerwald
2018-09-17 12:58 ` Guenter Roeck
` (3 subsequent siblings)
9 siblings, 1 reply; 24+ messages in thread
From: Martin Steigerwald @ 2018-09-17 7:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Torvalds; +Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List
Dear Linus.
Linus Torvalds - 16.09.18, 21:22:
> This is my reality. I am not an emotionally empathetic kind of person
> and that probably doesn't come as a big surprise to anybody. Least
> of all me. The fact that I then misread people and don't realize
> (for years) how badly I've judged a situation and contributed to an
> unprofessional environment is not good.
>
> This week people in our community confronted me about my lifetime of
> not understanding emotions. My flippant attacks in emails have been
> both unprofessional and uncalled for. Especially at times when I made
> it personal. In my quest for a better patch, this made sense to me.
> I know now this was not OK and I am truly sorry.
>
> The above is basically a long-winded way to get to the somewhat
> painful personal admission that hey, I need to change some of my
> behavior, and I want to apologize to the people that my personal
> behavior hurt and possibly drove away from kernel development
> entirely.
I applaud you for the courage to go the bold step you have gone with
this mail. I can imagine coming up with this mail has been challenging
for you.
Your step provides a big chance for a shift to happen towards a more
welcoming and friendly Linux kernel community. From what I saw here as
mostly someone who tests rc kernels and as mostly a by-stander of kernel
development you may not be the only one here having challenges to deal
with emotions.
I once learned that there may be two types of personality, one who dives
deeply into emotions and one who does not. Two types of personality who
often have challenges to understand each other. I believe that people of
those two types of personality can learn from each other.
It is important to move beyond right and wrong or good and bad in this.
Whenever I act, I receive feedback (even the lack of feedback is a
feedback). Do I like this feedback? Or do I like to create a different
result? If I like to create a different result, its important to act
differently, as its unlikely that the same behavior will create a
different result.
Thank you, Linus.
--
Martin
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: […] an apology, and a maintainership note
2018-09-17 7:57 ` […] " Martin Steigerwald
@ 2018-09-17 8:53 ` Martin Steigerwald
2018-09-30 12:09 ` Re: Linux 4.19-rc4 released, " lkcl
0 siblings, 1 reply; 24+ messages in thread
From: Martin Steigerwald @ 2018-09-17 8:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Torvalds; +Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List
Martin Steigerwald - 17.09.18, 09:57:
> Dear Linus.
>
> Linus Torvalds - 16.09.18, 21:22:
> > This is my reality. I am not an emotionally empathetic kind of
> > person and that probably doesn't come as a big surprise to anybody.
> > Least of all me. The fact that I then misread people and don't
> > realize (for years) how badly I've judged a situation and
> > contributed to an unprofessional environment is not good.
> >
> > This week people in our community confronted me about my lifetime of
> > not understanding emotions. My flippant attacks in emails have been
> > both unprofessional and uncalled for. Especially at times when I
> > made it personal. In my quest for a better patch, this made sense
> > to me. I know now this was not OK and I am truly sorry.
> >
> > The above is basically a long-winded way to get to the somewhat
> > painful personal admission that hey, I need to change some of my
> > behavior, and I want to apologize to the people that my personal
> > behavior hurt and possibly drove away from kernel development
> > entirely.
>
> I applaud you for the courage to go the bold step you have gone with
> this mail. I can imagine coming up with this mail has been challenging
> for you.
>
> Your step provides a big chance for a shift to happen towards a more
> welcoming and friendly Linux kernel community. From what I saw here as
> mostly someone who tests rc kernels and as mostly a by-stander of
> kernel development you may not be the only one here having challenges
> to deal with emotions.
That written: Quite some of the rude mails that contained swearwords I
read from you have been about code, not persons. I think this is an
important distinction. I do not have much of an issue with swearing at
code :), especially when it is in some humorous way.
Code quality indeed is important.
As are human interactions.
--
Martin
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: Re: Linux 4.19-rc4 released, an apology, and a maintainership note
2018-09-17 8:53 ` Martin Steigerwald
@ 2018-09-30 12:09 ` lkcl
2018-09-30 14:07 ` Martin Steigerwald
0 siblings, 1 reply; 24+ messages in thread
From: lkcl @ 2018-09-30 12:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: martin; +Cc: linux-kernel, torvalds
> That written: Quite some of the rude mails that contained swearwords I
> read from you have been about code, not persons. I think this is an
> important distinction. I do not have much of an issue with swearing at
> code :), especially when it is in some humorous way.
absolutely, and this is one thing that a lot of people are, sadly,
trained pretty much from birth to be incapable of understanding:
namely the difference between criticism of the PERSON and criticism
of the ACTION.
(1) "YOU are bad! GO STAND IN THE NAUGHTY CORNER!"
(2) "That was a BAD thing to do!"
(3) "That hurt my feelings that you did that"
the first is the way that poorly-trained parents and kindergarten
teachers talk to children.
the second is... only marginally better, but it's a start
the third is how UNICEF trains teachers to treat children as human beings.
> Code quality indeed is important.
> As are human interactions.
absolutely. it's not about the code, it's always, *always* about people.
we just happen to be writing code, but ultimately we are doing so in the
service of other PEOPLE.
l.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: Linux 4.19-rc4 released, an apology, and a maintainership note
2018-09-30 12:09 ` Re: Linux 4.19-rc4 released, " lkcl
@ 2018-09-30 14:07 ` Martin Steigerwald
2018-09-30 16:27 ` Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
0 siblings, 1 reply; 24+ messages in thread
From: Martin Steigerwald @ 2018-09-30 14:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lkcl; +Cc: linux-kernel, torvalds
lkcl@lkcl.net - 30.09.18, 14:09:
> > That written: Quite some of the rude mails that contained swearwords
> > I read from you have been about code, not persons. I think this is
> > an important distinction. I do not have much of an issue with
> > swearing at code :), especially when it is in some humorous way.
>
> absolutely, and this is one thing that a lot of people are, sadly,
> trained pretty much from birth to be incapable of understanding:
> namely the difference between criticism of the PERSON and criticism
> of the ACTION.
>
> (1) "YOU are bad! GO STAND IN THE NAUGHTY CORNER!"
> (2) "That was a BAD thing to do!"
> (3) "That hurt my feelings that you did that"
>
> the first is the way that poorly-trained parents and kindergarten
> teachers talk to children.
>
> the second is... only marginally better, but it's a start
>
> the third is how UNICEF trains teachers to treat children as human
> beings.
During releasing a lot of limiting "stuff" I found that probably nothing
written or said can hurt my feelings unless I let it do so or even…
unless I choose (!) to feel hurt about it. So at times I am clear about
this, I´d say: "I have chosen to feel hurt about what you did."
However in this human experience a lot of people, including myself,
still hold on to a lot of limiting "stuff" which invites feeling hurt.
We, as humankind, have a history of hurting each other.
During this releasing work I also learned about two key ingredients of
successful relationships: Harmlessness and mutuality. I opted out of the
hurting cycle as best I can. And so I choose to write in a way that
moves around what from my own experience of feeling hurt I know could
hurt others. I choose to write in a harmless way so to say. While still
aiming to bring my point across. A very important ingredient for this is
to write from my own experience.
Of course others can feel hurt about something I would not feel hurt
about and I may not be aware that the other might feel hurt about. That
is why in such a case it is important to give and receive feedback.
Still when writing from my own experience without saying that anything
is wrong with the other, it appears to be unlikely to trigger hurt. That
is at least my experience so far.
Thanks,
--
Martin
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: Linux 4.19-rc4 released, an apology, and a maintainership note
2018-09-30 14:07 ` Martin Steigerwald
@ 2018-09-30 16:27 ` Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton @ 2018-09-30 16:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Martin Steigerwald; +Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linus Torvalds
On Sun, Sep 30, 2018 at 3:07 PM, Martin Steigerwald <martin@lichtvoll.de> wrote:
> lkcl@lkcl.net - 30.09.18, 14:09:
>> the third is how UNICEF trains teachers to treat children as human
>> beings.
>
> During releasing a lot of limiting "stuff" I found that probably nothing
> written or said can hurt my feelings unless I let it do so or even…
> unless I choose (!) to feel hurt about it. So at times I am clear about
> this, I´d say: "I have chosen to feel hurt about what you did."
it's interesting to me to note that you use the word "releasing".
that's a keyword that i recognise from energy work, which,
surprisingly is increasingly being recognised and used by individuals
and businesses all over the world. it seems that people are beginning
to recognise it's actually effective and no longer associated with
cloud-cuckoo-land "detached-from-reality" new age hippies. i was
going to [privately] recommend someone who specifically works with
businesses and organisations to linus: i haven't heard from him yet.
> However in this human experience a lot of people, including myself,
> still hold on to a lot of limiting "stuff" which invites feeling hurt.
> We, as humankind, have a history of hurting each other.
this is why i recommended http://pndc.com in my earlier post. one of
the documents there points out that due to our still-remaining
"survival" instincts from millenia of evolution, words *literally* can
have the same effect on us as if we were actually physically and i
MEAN literally physically being attacked... [*IF WE CHOOSE* to be].
where people have not yet learned the difference between "that was a
bad thing to do" and "YOU are bad" (and interpret those as being
exactly the same thing), we have a compound effect. one person says
"that's a really dumb piece of code", the person hearing it interprets
it as "you're a fucking idiot", and has a LITERAL physical response to
the words [that you didn't actually say] as if you'd just punched them
in the mouth.
> During this releasing work I also learned about two key ingredients of
> successful relationships: Harmlessness and mutuality. I opted out of the
> hurting cycle as best I can. And so I choose to write in a way that
> moves around what from my own experience of feeling hurt I know could
> hurt others. I choose to write in a harmless way so to say. While still
> aiming to bring my point across. A very important ingredient for this is
> to write from my own experience.
yes, absolutely. that's pretty much word-for-word exactly the advice
given on the _other_ resource i recommended to linus,
http://www.crnhq.org/. let me find it.... ok, "appropriate
assertiveness": http://www.crnhq.org/CR-Kit.aspx?rw=c#assertiveness
quote:
" The essence of Appropriate Assertiveness is being able to state
your case without arousing the defences of the other person. The
secret of success lies in saying how it is for you rather than what
they should or shouldn't do. "The way I see it...", attached to your
assertive statement, helps. A skilled "I" statement goes even
further."
and it goes on from there.
> Of course others can feel hurt about something I would not feel hurt
> about and I may not be aware that the other might feel hurt about. That
> is why in such a case it is important to give and receive feedback.
> Still when writing from my own experience without saying that anything
> is wrong with the other, it appears to be unlikely to trigger hurt. That
> is at least my experience so far.
exactly. i believe you may be interested to know of the next phases
in that: the crnhq's "appropriate assertiveness" advice has a really
good template for keeping things to "I", and at the same time
successfully getting the point across. i won't quote all of it to
you.
i believe crhnq is written by a guy who has stopped warring tribes
from centuries of killing each other (and i don't mean
metaphorically), so it's clearly effective.
caveat: my only concern about these kinds of ways of thinking is,
sometimes you do actually genuinely need to give people a short, sharp
shock: that's part of NLP. *after* the shock, you can be "nice" to
them: where previously they were pathologically unable to listen, a
shock gets them out of the psychosis that they were in. it's also a
recognised medical treatment for people who are hysterical in disaster
/ emergency scenarios to shock them out of their screaming fit. note:
not recommended without proper training!!
l.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: Linux 4.19-rc4 released, an apology, and a maintainership note
2018-09-16 19:22 Linux 4.19-rc4 released, an apology, and a maintainership note Linus Torvalds
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2018-09-17 7:57 ` […] " Martin Steigerwald
@ 2018-09-17 12:58 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-09-17 17:09 ` Joe Perches
` (2 subsequent siblings)
9 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Guenter Roeck @ 2018-09-17 12:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Torvalds; +Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List
On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 12:22:43PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> [ So this email got a lot longer than I initially thought it would
> get, but let's start out with the "regular Sunday release" part ]
>
> Another week, another rc.
>
Build results:
total: 135 pass: 134 fail: 1
Failed builds:
sparc32:allmodconfig
Qemu test results:
total: 315 pass: 315 fail: 0
All problems fixed except for the sparc32 build problems. I'll keep
building sparc32:allmodconfig for the time being, but I may drop it
by the time of the final release.
As for runtime warnings, the only warning left in my test boots is
WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 1 at mm/slab.c:2666 cache_alloc_refill+0x8a/0x594
for sh4 boots. This has been discussed at
https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/8/3/773
https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-sh/msg53298.html
https://marc.info/?t=153301426900002&r=1&w=2
but unfortunately the discussion has stalled.
Guenter
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: Linux 4.19-rc4 released, an apology, and a maintainership note
2018-09-16 19:22 Linux 4.19-rc4 released, an apology, and a maintainership note Linus Torvalds
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2018-09-17 12:58 ` Guenter Roeck
@ 2018-09-17 17:09 ` Joe Perches
2018-09-17 21:09 ` Michael Woods
2018-10-08 16:36 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
9 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Joe Perches @ 2018-09-17 17:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Torvalds, Linux Kernel Mailing List; +Cc: Greg KH
On Sun, 2018-09-16 at 12:22 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Greg Kroah-Hartman (1):
> Code of Conduct: Let's revamp it.
I believe it would be better if this sort of change
had on-list and public discussion before being applied.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: Linux 4.19-rc4 released, an apology, and a maintainership note
2018-09-16 19:22 Linux 4.19-rc4 released, an apology, and a maintainership note Linus Torvalds
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2018-09-17 17:09 ` Joe Perches
@ 2018-09-17 21:09 ` Michael Woods
2018-09-18 1:30 ` Pavel Snajdr
2018-10-08 16:36 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
9 siblings, 1 reply; 24+ messages in thread
From: Michael Woods @ 2018-09-17 21:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: torvalds; +Cc: linux-kernel
Hi Linus,
> The one change that stands out and merits mention is the code of
> conduct addition...
The Code of Conflict was perfectly fine. Whomever convinced you to add
the Code of Conduct was convincing you to give control over to a social
justice initiative that has no interest in the kernel's core function or
reason for existence.
"Codes of conduct are tools used by the incompetent to wrest control
away from the people who own the project, so they can feed on the corpse
and wear the skin of the project as a fetish play"
Examples of these people trying to introduce codes of conduct, with
commentary on the emotions and motivations driving CoC introduction:
- LLVM: http://voxday.blogspot.com/2018/05/the-costs-of-code-of-conduct.html
- PHP: http://voxday.blogspot.com/2016/01/initial-sjw-attack-defeated.html
- PHP 2: http://voxday.blogspot.com/2016/01/a-second-sjw-attack-on-php.html
- Ruby: http://voxday.blogspot.com/2016/01/more-sjw-attacks-in-tech.html
- Ruby 2:
http://voxday.blogspot.com/2016/01/the-sjw-war-on-ruby-continues.html
- Node.js: http://voxday.blogspot.com/2017/08/how-sjws-react-to-defeat.html
- Awesome-Django:
http://voxday.blogspot.com/2015/10/exposing-true-face-of-sjw.html
- Go: http://voxday.blogspot.com/2015/06/you-cant-run-you-cant-hide.html
Some alternative ideas should you wish to rethink the Code of Conduct:
- Code of Merit: http://voxday.blogspot.com/2016/01/code-of-merit.html
- No Code of Conduct:
http://voxday.blogspot.com/2016/01/no-code-of-conduct.html
> This is my reality. I am not an emotionally empathetic kind of person
> and that probably doesn't come as a big surprise to anybody. Least of
> all me. The fact that I then misread people and don't realize (for
> years) how badly I've judged a situation and contributed to an
> unprofessional environment is not good.
It has been good, this is easily proven by the quality and success of
the Linux kernel. If you start being "nice" instead of forthright, every
excuse in the mental health cookbook will be used to persuade you that
emotions of the incompetent and their politics, are more important than
improving the kernel.
> This week people in our community confronted me about my lifetime of
> not understanding emotions. My flippant attacks in emails have been
> both unprofessional and uncalled for. Especially at times when I made
> it personal. In my quest for a better patch, this made sense to me.
> I know now this was not OK and I am truly sorry.
>
> The above is basically a long-winded way to get to the somewhat
> painful personal admission that hey, I need to change some of my
> behavior, and I want to apologize to the people that my personal
> behavior hurt and possibly drove away from kernel development
> entirely.
You are not that bad. The incompetent and mentally ill have convinced
you to act against your best interests, and those of the Linux kernel.
> I am going to take time off and get some assistance on how to
> understand people’s emotions and respond appropriately.
Don't try to understand people's emotions, it has not been necessary and
is not necessary. It is a trap, set to weaken your resolve and standards.
> To tie this all back to the actual 4.19-rc4 release (no, really, this
> _is_ related!) I actually think that 4.19 is looking fairly good,
> things have gotten to the "calm" period of the release cycle, and I've
> talked to Greg to ask him if he'd mind finishing up 4.19 for me, so
> that I can take a break, and try to at least fix my own behavior.
> I know when I really look “myself in the mirror” it will be clear it's
> not the only change that has to happen, but hey... You can send me
> suggestions in email.
I wish you the very best, my hope is that you recuperate & take stock,
realise how the snakes tricked you and come back with a vengeance.
Kindest Regards,
Michael
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: Linux 4.19-rc4 released, an apology, and a maintainership note
2018-09-17 21:09 ` Michael Woods
@ 2018-09-18 1:30 ` Pavel Snajdr
2018-09-21 22:13 ` Michael Woods
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Snajdr @ 2018-09-18 1:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: michaeljpwoods; +Cc: linux-kernel
On 2018-09-17 23:09, Michael Woods wrote:
>
> The Code of Conflict was perfectly fine. Whomever convinced you to add
> the Code of Conduct was convincing you to give control over to a
> social justice initiative that has no interest in the kernel's core
> function or reason for existence.
>
Hi Michael,
and how about if we viewed the new Code of Conduct as about the same
thing as BitKeeper was for the development process?
It was not perfect, but wass *something* for a start. And I believe that
Linus will probably come back with a Git of CoC, or something in that
fasion.
I've been always looking up to the guys leading major community projects
and how they go about things - and I think, that most of the bad
fall-out in them is caused by insanely high expectations - firstly from
the leader themselves, and secondly from others as well.
/snajpa
P.S.: this is my first "contribution" to LKML, I hope to start sending
up some of my very prototype work soon for discussion, regarding the
Cgroup subsystem ID allocation & limits - and subsequently, start a
discussion about getting Linux to do better OS-level containers (ie.
those, which have a "look&feel of a real VM" from the admin's
perspective).
We started our organization (vpsFree.org) on top of OpenVZ patch set and
are now working to get vanilla up to the task of replacing the venerable
2.6.32-based OpenVZ 6 Linux-like thing. The new Code of Conduct is a
guarantee for us, that we won't be laughed out of the room and that our
members won't be demotivated to contribute upstream - if we can all
agree to be nice on each other; yet we still need you guys to tell us,
when we're trying stupid things or going about things the wrong way, in
some way that we will notice & can learn from.
If I understand the context correctly, the previous "regime" could be
the culprit, at least to some extent, why still don't have the VM
look&feel-having containers with vanilla. So I'm just really trying to
say, that I'm really excited about the signal this change has sent.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: Linux 4.19-rc4 released, an apology, and a maintainership note
2018-09-18 1:30 ` Pavel Snajdr
@ 2018-09-21 22:13 ` Michael Woods
2018-10-04 14:57 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-10-08 13:54 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
2 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Michael Woods @ 2018-09-21 22:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pavel Snajdr; +Cc: linux-kernel
Hi Pavel,
> and how about if we viewed the new Code of Conduct as about the same
> thing as BitKeeper was for the development process?
You should view the Code of Conduct for what it is, as I referenced
previously with real world examples, the evidence shows that it is just
a ploy to take control away from the competent and give it to the
incompetent.
An example of the hypocrisy Linus is in for:
a) From Coraline Ada Ehmke's Code of Conduct:
> Our Standards
>
> Examples of behavior that contributes to creating a positive environment
> include:
>
> * Using welcoming and inclusive language
and
> Examples of unacceptable behavior by participants include:
>
> * Trolling, insulting/derogatory comments, and personal or political
> attacks
> * Public or private harassment
> * Other conduct which could reasonably be considered inappropriate in a
> professional setting
b)
> https://twitter.com/CoralineAda/status/1042249983590838272
> Coraline Ada Ehmke, @CoralineAda
> 40,000 open source projects, including Linux, Rails, Golang, and
> everything OSS produced by Google, Microsoft, and Apple have adopted
> my code of conduct.
>
> You can make me have a bad day, but it doesn’t change the fact that we
> have won and you have lost.
In software projects, there will be no "calling out" of bad behaviour
for the self identifed victims this was written for, whom are invariably
the least useful contributors and most capable of inventing victim
narratives. The CoC will be used by the mentally ill and incapable to
create accusations for attacking competent individuals.
> It was not perfect, but wass *something* for a start.
A Code of Conduct is not required, to the contrary, all successful
software projects, if they wish to remain so, should never adopt one. I
previously referenced preferable alternatives.
> I've been always looking up to the guys leading major community
> projects and how they go about things - and I think, that most of the
> bad fall-out in them is caused by insanely high expectations - firstly
> from the leader themselves, and secondly from others as well.
Linus has excelled up to this point, the Code of Conduct will stifle his
ability to maintain the kernel.
> The new Code of Conduct is a guarantee for us, that we won't be
> laughed out of the room and that our members won't be demotivated to
> contribute upstream - if we can all agree to be nice on each other;
> yet we still need you guys to tell us, when we're trying stupid things
> or going about things the wrong way, in some way that we will notice &
> can learn from.
The one thing you do not understand, which is key to understanding why
complex projects are successful, most people are not intelligent enough
to contribute. Their contributions if accepted, would create chaos, and
if not simply rejected, would create long backlogs due to the amount of
effort required to explain why their code is not of the standard required.
> If I understand the context correctly, the previous "regime" could be
> the culprit, at least to some extent, why still don't have the VM
> look&feel-having containers with vanilla. So I'm just really trying to
> say, that I'm really excited about the signal this change has sent.
This is not a believable position, that you were waiting for a Code of
Conduct before contributing successfully to the Linux Kernel.
Regards,
Michael
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: Linux 4.19-rc4 released, an apology, and a maintainership note
2018-09-18 1:30 ` Pavel Snajdr
2018-09-21 22:13 ` Michael Woods
@ 2018-10-04 14:57 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-10-08 15:29 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
2018-10-08 13:54 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
2 siblings, 1 reply; 24+ messages in thread
From: Eric W. Biederman @ 2018-10-04 14:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pavel Snajdr; +Cc: michaeljpwoods, linux-kernel
Pavel Snajdr <snajpa@snajpa.net> writes:
>
> We started our organization (vpsFree.org) on top of OpenVZ patch set and are now
> working to get vanilla up to the task of replacing the venerable 2.6.32-based
> OpenVZ 6 Linux-like thing. The new Code of Conduct is a guarantee for us, that
> we won't be laughed out of the room and that our members won't be demotivated
> to contribute upstream - if we can all agree to be nice on each other; yet we
> still need you guys to tell us, when we're trying stupid things or going about
> things the wrong way, in some way that we will notice & can learn from.
> If I understand the context correctly, the previous "regime" could be the
> culprit, at least to some extent, why still don't have the VM look&feel-having
> containers with vanilla.
At an implementation level namespaces and cgroups are hard. Coming up
with a good solid design that is very maintainable and handles all of
the corner cases is difficult. Very few people choose to do the work
of digging into the details and figuring out what is really needed.
This is not an area where you can hand hold someone. It really takes
people who are able to work out from first principles what the code will
need to do.
Very often people will propose patches that do solve their specific case
but only do 10% or maybe 20% of what is needed for a general kernel
level solution. For something that just works and does not cause
maintenance problems in the long run.
Someone has to deep dive and understand all of the problems and sort it
out.
That takes a person that is willing and able to stand up with all of the
rest of the kernel developers as an equal. It requires listening to
other opinions to see where you need to change and where things are
wrong but it also requires being able to figure things out for yourself
and to come up with solid technical contributions.
I hope I have been something reasonable to work with on this front, if
not please let me know.
I know many other maintainers get hit with such a stream of bad
container ideas that they tend to stop listening. As their priorities
are elsewhere I don't blame them.
Also don't forget that most of the time to do a good implemenation that it
requires rewriting an entire subsystem to make it container friendly.
Think of the effort that requires, especially when you are not allowed
to cause regressions in the subystem while rewriting it.
Further the only power a maintainer has is to accept patches, to listen
to people, and to express opinions that are worth listening to. In the
midst of doing all of those things a maintainers time is limited.
You said a change in attitude gives you optimism that you can make work
with the upstream kernel. I am glad you have optimism as overall the
kernel is a welcoming place.
At the same time there can't be guarantees that people won't be
demontivated. If you care about the remaining kernel problems for
implementing containers, you need to realize those that are difficult
problems that don't easily admit to solutions. That is why the problems
still remain. To get a small flavor just look at how much work I had to
go through to sort out siginfo in the kernel which is just one very
small piece of the larger puzzle. So please realize that sometimes
actually realizing the scope of the technical difficulties might be
demotivating in and of itself.
Similarly because maintainers have a limited amount of time there are no
guarantees how much we can help others. We can try but people have to
meet maintainers at least half way in figuring out how things work
themselves, and sometimes there is just not enough time to say anything.
As the old saying goes: "You can lead a horse to water but you can't make
him drink".
So there are no guarantees that people won't be demotivated or that they
will learn what is necessary. All that we can do is aim to keep
conversations polite and focused on the technical details of the project.
Which should keep things from getting unpleasant at the level of humans
interacting with humans. I don't think that will give you greater
guarantees beyond that, and it feels like you are reading greater
guarantees into recent events.
I would like to see what you see as missing from the mainline
kernel. But that is a topic for the containers list, and possibly for
the containers track at Linux Plumbers conference in Vancouver.
Eric
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: Linux 4.19-rc4 released, an apology, and a maintainership note
2018-10-04 14:57 ` Eric W. Biederman
@ 2018-10-08 15:29 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2018-10-08 15:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eric W. Biederman, Pavel Snajdr; +Cc: michaeljpwoods, linux-kernel
On 04.10.2018 16:57, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Very often people will propose patches that do solve their specific case
> but only do 10% or maybe 20% of what is needed for a general kernel
> level solution. For something that just works and does not cause
> maintenance problems in the long run.
One of the cases is the hard realtime stuff. A perfect implementation
for hard-RT environments can easily turn out as total crap for
generic server workloads. So, these things really take time make both
worlds fit together. For those cases, it's often better to maintain
it as a separate tree/patchset and step by step try to bring those
pieces to mainline, that fit in there.
> I know many other maintainers get hit with such a stream of bad
> container ideas that they tend to stop listening. As their priorities
> are elsewhere I don't blame them.
Let's put it that way: these ideas probaly aren't necessarily bad as
such, but just don't fit into mainline (yet).
OVZ is such a case: it's s good thing for a range of usecases, and
pretty successful there. But it conflicts lots of other places that the
mainline has to support. Therefore it has to stay a separate tree, until
we've found a better solution, somewhere in the future.
> Similarly because maintainers have a limited amount of time there are no
> guarantees how much we can help others. We can try but people have to
> meet maintainers at least half way in figuring out how things work
> themselves, and sometimes there is just not enough time to say anything.
Yes. I've been demotivated by this problem myself. But I know, I can't
expect anybody else do to my homework for me.
--mtx
--
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
Free software and Linux embedded engineering
info@metux.net -- +49-151-27565287
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: Linux 4.19-rc4 released, an apology, and a maintainership note
2018-09-18 1:30 ` Pavel Snajdr
2018-09-21 22:13 ` Michael Woods
2018-10-04 14:57 ` Eric W. Biederman
@ 2018-10-08 13:54 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
2 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2018-10-08 13:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pavel Snajdr, michaeljpwoods; +Cc: linux-kernel
On 18.09.2018 03:30, Pavel Snajdr wrote:
Hi folks,
I usually try to stay out of political issues in software projects
(there're already too much real political problems, where people need
to stand up and push away actual oppressors), but now I have the bad
feeling that political (or more precisely: social engineering)
techniques are abused against the Linux kernel project.
> and how about if we viewed the new Code of Conduct as about the same> thing as BitKeeper was for the development process?
Bitkeeper was used as an intermediate workaround for conceptional
deficiencies in CVS (and all other tools based on the same principles).
But I really don't see any conceptional deficiencies in the way the
Linux kernel community worked in the last decades. Actually, it worked
very, very well. It created the best general purpose OS kernel in
known history, that scales from small embedded to big clusters.
And this has *VERY MUCH* to do with how the community worked for the
last decades. IMHO, it's even the primary reason. Not having to care
about personal behaviours, corporate hierarchies, marketing, whatsnot,
only care about technical excellence. Nothing more, nothing less.
> It was not perfect, but wass *something* for a start.
A start for what exactly ? Just for the sake of doing *something* ?
Well, that sounds like the typical corporate manager's / politician's
behaviour pattern: There seems to be a problem, we need to do something
fast - doing nothing is worse than not doing anything quick enough.
Yeah, that's exactly what I'm regularily observing with my clients (the
bigger the corporation, the worse). And that's exactly why so many of
their projects fail so miserably, and products are such a crap.
I really hate the idea of the Linux community falling into the same
trap. (many of the GUI projects already did, and their code is crap)
The best thing, IMHO, is to totally ignore any kind 'social rules'
and focus on the actual technical goals. And don't take anything here
personally. *If* there really happen some ugly personal attacks, we
can talk about that on a case by case basis.
> I've been always looking up to the guys leading major community projects> and how they go about things - and I think, that most of the bad>
fall-out in them is caused by insanely high expectations - firstly from>
the leader themselves, and secondly from others as well.
Can you give some example of such bad fall-out ?
> P.S.: this is my first "contribution" to LKML, I hope to start sending> up some of my very prototype work soon for discussion, regarding the>
Cgroup subsystem ID allocation & limits - and subsequently, start a>
discussion about getting Linux to do better OS-level containers (ie.>
those, which have a "look&feel of a real VM" from the admin's perspective).
Please add me to CC. I'm working on similar areas (if my time budget
allows ;-)).
Even better: create a separate maillist for that, if there's not already
some fitting one. LKML's a pretty crowded already.
> We started our organization (vpsFree.org) on top of OpenVZ patch set and> are now working to get vanilla up to the task of replacing the
venerable> 2.6.32-based OpenVZ 6 Linux-like thing.
What exactly are you yet missing in current mainline ?
Are these things that really need to be done in the kernel or could
it be done in userland ?
My personal area of interest in the container context isn't the usual
'put a whole system in a box'-thing, but instead using namespace
isolation an general software architectual feature, similar to the
Plan9 world - eg. allow unprivileged processes to manipulate their own
fs namespace at will, use synthetic filesystems as generic IPC, split
huge applications into small and resusable programs, etc.
> The new Code of Conduct is a guarantee for us, that we won't be laughed out
> of the room and that our members won't be demotivated to contribute upstream
Seriously ? You really need some kind of 'social law' that protects you
from the risk of being laughed out ?
No offense, but if that's really the case, then you've got a much
bigger, more serious problem, which also persuades you in your daily
life: deep lack of self confidence. I feel very sorry for that,
and I'm offering my help. For anybody who feels that way.
Yes, I had exactly that problem for my whole childhood and youth, until
I've learned a vital lesson: It just *DOES NOT* matter whether some
people laugh about you or your work - as long as you're sure that you
your work is the right thing for *YOU*. Simply ignore the trolls.
(BTW, the really good point on FOSS is: you can fork anytime and do
whatever changes you feel right for you - no matter what anybody out
there thinks about them).
So, don't let such things come into your way. Just do whatever you feel
the right thing to do and then let's talk about that.
I have no idea whether your patches have a chance to mainline anytime
soon. But that shouldn't even matter. Solving a specific problem and
fitting in something into the big generic world are two entirely
different things. Many great things (eg. various container subsystems,
realtime, android stuff, ...) went a long way towards mainline, some
still have a long way to go. That's just because it's these topics
are far from being trivial. And that shouldn't stop anybody.
> If I understand the context correctly, the previous "regime" could be
> the culprit, at least to some extent, why still don't have the VM
> look&feel-having containers with vanilla.
Why exactly do you think so ?
What exactly are you missing here ?
Where's the connection to social rules ?
--mtx
--
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
Free software and Linux embedded engineering
info@metux.net -- +49-151-27565287
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: Linux 4.19-rc4 released, an apology, and a maintainership note
2018-09-16 19:22 Linux 4.19-rc4 released, an apology, and a maintainership note Linus Torvalds
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2018-09-17 21:09 ` Michael Woods
@ 2018-10-08 16:36 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
9 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2018-10-08 16:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Torvalds, Linux Kernel Mailing List
On 16.09.2018 21:22, Linus Torvalds wrote:
Hi,
<snip>
> One was simply my own reaction to having screwed up my scheduling of
> the maintainership summit: yes, I was somewhat embarrassed about
> having screwed up my calendar, but honestly, I was mostly hopeful that
> I wouldn't have to go to the kernel summit that I have gone to every
> year for just about the last two decades.
IMHO, if you - for whatever reason - want to skip a conference, it's
your right to do so. You've done so much for us, you deserve a break.
> This is my reality. I am not an emotionally empathetic kind of person
> and that probably doesn't come as a big surprise to anybody. Least of
> all me. The fact that I then misread people and don't realize (for
> years) how badly I've judged a situation and contributed to an
> unprofessional environment is not good.
I, personally, never felt the Linux kernel community was anything like
an unprofessional environment in any way. Quite the opposite.
Certainly, there's room for improvement here and there, but IMHO, the
general situation is the best of all projects I've been involved in.
Don't be so hard on yourself.
> This week people in our community confronted me about my lifetime of
> not understanding emotions. My flippant attacks in emails have been
> both unprofessional and uncalled for. Especially at times when I made
> it personal. In my quest for a better patch, this made sense to me.
> I know now this was not OK and I am truly sorry.
Maybe I've missed these mails you're referring to, but I didn't see
anything which IMHO wasn't justified. Even if you'd call a patch of
mine "the greatest bullshit i've ever seen", I wouldn't consider this
a personal attack for a ns. Because I know I would have come from a
completely different perspective than mine.
> The above is basically a long-winded way to get to the somewhat
> painful personal admission that hey, I need to change some of my
> behavior, and I want to apologize to the people that my personal
> behavior hurt and possibly drove away from kernel development
> entirely.
I don't know anybody of these people personally, so I won't judge on
that. I've just seen some blog posts, which looked pretty subjective
to me and didn't tell what exactly happened. My theory is that people
took things personal, which haven't been personal at all. But that
seems to be a general problem, which is far out of scope of any
professional software project.
> This is not some kind of "I'm burnt out, I need to just go away"
> break. I'm not feeling like I don't want to continue maintaining
> Linux. Quite the reverse. I very much *do* want to continue to do
> this project that I've been working on for almost three decades.
:)
> And yes, some of it might be "just" tooling. Maybe I can get an email
> filter in place so at when I send email with curse-words, they just
> won't go out. Because hey, I'm a big believer in tools, and at least
> _some_ problems going forward might be improved with simple
> automation.
In that case, I doubt it's a matter of tooling. It would require a kind
of artificial intelligence, that hasn't been invented yet. NP complete
problem.
If you really feel, your reactions on certain things, your way of
communication was a problem, then I'd raise the question why such
feelings, that trigger these reactions, come into your mind in the
first place.
I've been through something similar. I easily got angry about by bad
code and people not understanding things I considered self-evident.
And in my case, it actually escalated onto the personal level.
My approach was self-monitoring of my feelings and behaviour. Whenever
I felt my blood presure reasing, I took a cigarette break and thought
about why I'm thinking that way now. Usually, I came to the conclusion
that these folks who did some crap again, just don't know better, they
never seen what I've seen. And it's my job to train them.
This way of thinking helped me a lot, maybe it could help you and all
there other, too.
> I know when I really look “myself in the mirror” it will be clear it's
> not the only change that has to happen, but hey... You can send me
> suggestions in email.
Unfortunately, I have no idea, what exactly you've seen in the mirror.
I can only judge on what I've seen here in the last decades. And I like
you exactly that way. Especially the rude part, eg. when it's about
corporations like NVidia, or people who try to refit the Kernel for
their broken userland stuff.
If I may propose a patches to your /dev/brain, the only issue would be
100% strict GPL enforcement ;-)
--mtx
--
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
Free software and Linux embedded engineering
info@metux.net -- +49-151-27565287
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: Linux 4.19-rc4 released, an apology, and a maintainership note
2018-09-17 2:15 Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
@ 2018-09-18 2:10 ` Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
2018-09-30 11:47 ` Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
1 sibling, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton @ 2018-09-18 2:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Torvalds, Linux Kernel Mailing List, clm, dan.j.williams,
corbet, olof, rostedt, Greg KH
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=8a104f8b5867c682d994ffa7a74093c54469c11f
ahh, guys? ah... i'm going to try *really* hard to follow the advice
that's listed here ok?
http://www.pndc.com/documents/_PDF%20Text-PNDC%20WORKS.pdf it's a
little challenging to do so in email, as it's specifically designed
(page 6) for face-to-face conversations.
following point (1) on page 6, i believe that the question i should
be asking is best phrased as follows:
* what was the intent behind the change to a "code of conduct"?
following point (4) on page 7, a second question i believe should be
phrased as follows:
* whilst the "positive" list of behaviours look good on first glance,
we've witnessed what happened with freebsd when they adopted a "code
of conduct": would a (public) reasonable and rational discussion with
a view to removing the "proscribed" list of negative behaviours be
welcome? [1]
l.
[1] it's a little more complex than that, you get the general idea.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: Linux 4.19-rc4 released, an apology, and a maintainership note
2018-09-17 2:15 Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
2018-09-18 2:10 ` Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
@ 2018-09-30 11:47 ` Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
1 sibling, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton @ 2018-09-30 11:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Torvalds, Linux Kernel Mailing List
https://linux.slashdot.org/story/18/09/27/1529236/linus-torvalds-on-linuxs-code-of-conduct#comments
linus: ah... um... okay so this is beginning to remind me of dr who
films, the comedy film "the world's end", and various other b-movie
horror shows where people were taken over through mind-control or
replaced.
so i apologise, i'm going to stop pussy-footing around and ask HAVE
YOU FUCKING LOST IT, GET YOUR HEAD OUT YOUR ARSE, STOP FEELING SORRY
FOR YOURSELF AND GET BACK TO BEING AN ENGINEER, YOU ARE ON A
CHEARRRRGEUUH YOU SORRY LITTLE PROGRAMMERRRRR
*cough*. enough NLP-esque shock tactics with a bit of comedy thrown
in to take the sting out of it... allow me to return to rational
insights.
(1) you apologised for your behaviour, and it's fantastic that you
recognised that there was a problem and asked for help. however, you
*may* be feeling a little guilty, and it's clearly knocked your
confidence, and that unfortunately has allowed political correctness
to "creep in" where we know it never, ever belongs: in engineering.
the next thing you know, the fucking guilt-ridden morons who want the
words "master" and "slave" erased from the history books will be
telling you that we have to change SPI's "MOSI" and "MISO" to...
god... i dunno... "ROWI and RIWO" - "requestor" and "worker" or
something incredibly stupid:
Requestor: "i'm awfully sorry, if you wouldn't mind, if it's not too
much trouble mr worker, when you have the time and you're not on your
union-mandated break, could you deal with this bit-change for me?"
(2) more and more people are raising the fact that the change was made
without consultation. this *is* going to bite everyone. i strongly,
strongly suggest reverting it: i made the point very clear that it
wasn't the actual CoC that was the problem, it was that you, yourself,
were not really obeying it (so nobody else could, either).
(3) let's look at what toxic documents named "codes of conduct" look
like from an engineering perspective:
#define BEHAVIOUR_GOOD() ((~BEHAVIOUR_BAD) == 0)
#define BEHAVIOUR_BAD BEHAVIOUR_SEXIST | BEHAVIOUR_RACIST |
BEHAVIOUR_NAZI |
BEHAVIOUR_UNPLEASANT |
BEHAVIOUR_RELIGIOUS_EXTREMIST ....
#define BEHAVIOUR_RELIGIOUS_EXTREMIST \
BEHAVIOUR_ANTI_CHRISTIAN \
BEHAVIOUR_ANTI_MUSLIM \
...
....
....
#define BEHAVIOUR_ANTI_MUSLIM 0x1
#define BEHAVIOUR_ANTI_CHRISTIAN 0x2
...
...
...
// oops fuck we're gonna run out of bits extremely quickly....
do you see where that's going? do you get the point already? if an
engineer proposed the above patch to create the toxic CoC document
that insidiously crept in recently, you and pretty much everyone would
think that the submitter had a fucking screw loose and needed
psychiatric help.
these toxic documents do not have to spell it out, but they *imply*
that there are (deep breath...) spics, wocs, niggers, honky white
bastards, chinks kooks and their mothers too all trying to ATTACK the
project, and we'd better make sure that they're all excluded,
otherwise we're all in trouble, eh?
i apologise for using these words: if you are a decent human being you
should by now feeling physically sick to your stomach at having read
that paragraph, that those words were even used... yet they're not
actually *in* that toxic document, but they don't have to be: people
are still thinking them. like the "don't think of a pink elephant"
our subconscious mind cannot help by strip out the "don't".
bottom line: the *entire linux kernel project* has now been
*completely poisoned* by that document.
put another way: an engineer would go, "wtf??" and would say "we don't
need to fill every single bit in the bitfield and then invert it for
god's sake! just say "good behaviour is expected" and be done with
it!!"
so why not say, instead of that absolute god-awful list, "everyone is
welcome; everyone belongs". you see the difference? you see how
simple and empowering that is? it's INVITING people to participate,
and it's pretty obvious that if someone feels *UN*welcome, the rules
have been broken and they can raise it as an issue. rather than
absolutely terrifying and sickening absolutely everybody.
the analogy is the story of mother theresa being invited to an
"anti-war" rally. she declined... and said, "if ever you hold a PEACE
rally, i'd be delighted to attend".
so come on, linus: wake up, man. just because this is outside of your
area of expertise does not mean that you have to let go of the reins.
*get a grip*. use your engineering expertise, apply it to the
problem, work with *EVERYONE* and work out an *ACCEPTABLE* solution.
warmest,
l.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread