From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751336Ab3GPEMT (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Jul 2013 00:12:19 -0400 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:27696 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750892Ab3GPEMR (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Jul 2013 00:12:17 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.89,673,1367996400"; d="scan'208";a="346242035" Message-ID: <1373947920.12825.2.camel@envy.home> Subject: Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) From: Darren Hart To: Steven Rostedt Cc: NeilBrown , Guenter Roeck , Sarah Sharp , Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Dave Jones , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Andrew Morton , stable , ksummit-2013-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org, Willy Tarreau Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 21:12:00 -0700 In-Reply-To: <1373945863.17876.264.camel@gandalf.local.home> References: <20130715180403.GD15531@xanatos> <20130715184642.GE15531@xanatos> <20130715195316.GF15531@xanatos> <20130715204135.GH15531@xanatos> <1373926109.17876.221.camel@gandalf.local.home> <20130715223615.GI15531@xanatos> <20130715231555.GA24650@roeck-us.net> <1373933850.17876.224.camel@gandalf.local.home> <20130716131446.373ec08b@notabene.brown> <1373945681.17876.262.camel@gandalf.local.home> <1373945863.17876.264.camel@gandalf.local.home> Organization: Intel Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.8.3 (3.8.3-2.fc19) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2013-07-15 at 23:37 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Mon, 2013-07-15 at 23:34 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 13:14 +1000, NeilBrown wrote: > > > > > Surely there is an enormous difference between being required to defend your > > > position against rational and forceful argument, and being required to defend > > > it against irrelevant name calling. > > > > Sure, but I don't think there's really much name calling in the kernel > > community. > > > > I just scanned a large number of LKML emails, and they all seemed rather > > technical, and no personal attacks at all. And that included several > > emails from Linus as well. Probably the strongest email came from Thomas > > Gleixner, but even that didn't contain any personal name calling. Mostly > > he called stuff "crap" but that was about the code and claims that the > > code did, but not about the person. > > > > There are a few times that Linus gets a bit colorful with his > > criticisms, but that's really the minority of the email and not the > > overall tone. I think Linus picks his battles. Sometimes he goes > > overboard, but he's human. But I still think he's running this ship > > well. > > > > I just found this gem: https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/10/600 > > But it's just Linus ranting about having "make install" modify the > source tree (which I totally agree with him, as I've stumbled over crap > like this in other projects). But he's bitching about the code, not the > person who asked him to pull it. Excellent example Steve. This is the core of what I was trying to get at. Linus vehemently and colorfully expressed his distate for *problem* and told the developer what they needed to do differently. No personal attack there. Would I like to be on the receiving end of that email... No, I would not. However, I can also understand being fed up with lots of little things like this and not having the patience or the desire to treat each one as a mentoring opportunity. The difference tends to be I rant to my close friends and Linus does so in public.... he's the more honest of the two of us I think :-) -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center Yocto Project - Technical Lead - Linux Kernel