* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML @ 2013-07-17 20:07 George Spelvin 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: George Spelvin @ 2013-07-17 20:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: stefano.stabellini; +Cc: linux, linux-kernel, rostedt > I think it's pretty clear that one doesn't need to be verbally abusive > in order to stop bad code from getting into the kernel. Actually, it *not* clear. Without drawing fine distinctions about the definition of "abusive", I think Linus's rants have a real purpose at times. One is so that *everyone* hears it, not just the immediate target of his ire. I really remember "don't rebase just before sending upstream" precisely because there have been a few explosions on the subject. It's pretty obvious that Linus tries to be entertaining when going over the top, precisely so it's memorable. And it works. But the other thing is that Linux development is big business these days, and many contributors have to justify their time to managers and bean-counters. It makes their lives *easier* if Linus plays "bad cop". I remember a couple of blowups about the state of the ARM tree. I don't think Russell enjoyed it much, but that exchange gave him something to wave in front of his bosses, his contributors, and his contributors' bosses to say that the old sloppy ways had to change. If Linus had limited himself to what was needed to make Russell understand, it would have been all up to him to put pressure on his contributors. That's harder for someone without Linus' unassailable position. Yes, Linus put the nuclear option of not pulling the tree on the table, but the vigor with which he expressed his opinion helped keep him from having to *use* that option to make it clear that he was serious. Linus wasn't just yelling at Russell, but the entire ARM developer population, and being loud enough that everyone heard was a goal. It's an old military command maxim that good news should go through channels, while bad news should come direct from the boss. Linus' rants serve as that kind of "bad news from the top". As he wrote himself during the discussion: > I've told people this before, and I'll tell it again: when I flame > submaintainers, they should try to push the pain down. I'm not really > asking those submaintainers to clean up all the stuff they are > getting: I'm basically asking people to say "no", or at least push > back a lot, and argue with the people who send you code. Tell them > what you don't like about the code, and tell them that you can't take > it any more. There is definitely tension here, but I don't think it's as simple as "you don't need to shout to stop bad code getting into the kernel." Sometimes you *do* need to shout to make people think twice before sending crap upstream. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review @ 2013-07-15 15:52 Sarah Sharp 2013-07-15 17:08 ` Linus Torvalds 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-15 15:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: Steven Rostedt, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, Darren Hart On Fri, 12 Jul 2013 18:17:08 +0200, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote: > * Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > > > On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > > > > > > I tend to hold things off after -rc4 because you scare me more than Greg > > > does ;-) > > > > Have you guys *seen* Greg? The guy is a freakish giant. He *should* > > scare you. He might squish you without ever even noticing. > > Greg might be a giant and he might squish people without ever even > noticing, but that's just a grave, deadly physical threat no real kernel > hacker ever feels threatened by. (Not much can hurt us deep in our dark > basements after all, except maybe earthquakes, gamma ray eruptions and Mom > trying to clean up around the computers.) > > So Greg, if you want it all to change, create some _real_ threat: be frank > with contributors and sometimes swear a bit. That will cut your mailqueue > in half, promise! On Fri, 12 Jul 2013 08:22:27 -0700, Linus wrote: > Greg, the reason you get a lot of stable patches seems to be that you > make it easy to act as a door-mat. Clearly at least some people say "I > know this patch isn't important enough to send to Linus, but I know Greg > will silently accept it after the fact, so I'll just wait and mark it > for stable". > > You may need to learn to shout at people. Seriously, guys? Is this what we need in order to get improve -stable? Linus Torvalds is advocating for physical intimidation and violence. Ingo Molnar and Linus are advocating for verbal abuse. Not *fucking* cool. Violence, whether it be physical intimidation, verbal threats or verbal abuse is not acceptable. Keep it professional on the mailing lists. Let's discuss this at Kernel Summit where we can at least yell at each other in person. Yeah, just try yelling at me about this. I'll roar right back, louder, for all the people who lose their voice when they get yelled at by top maintainers. I won't be the nice girl anymore. Sarah Sharp ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review 2013-07-15 15:52 [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-15 17:08 ` Linus Torvalds 2013-07-15 17:46 ` Sarah Sharp 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Linus Torvalds @ 2013-07-15 17:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Steven Rostedt, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, Darren Hart On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 8:52 AM, Sarah Sharp <sarah.a.sharp@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > I'll roar > right back, louder, for all the people who lose their voice when they > get yelled at by top maintainers. I won't be the nice girl anymore. That's the spirit. Greg has taught you well. You have controlled your fear. Now, release your anger. Only your hatred can destroy me. Come to the dark side, Sarah. We have cookies. Linus ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review 2013-07-15 17:08 ` Linus Torvalds @ 2013-07-15 17:46 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-15 17:50 ` Linus Torvalds 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-15 17:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Steven Rostedt, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, Darren Hart On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:08:13AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 8:52 AM, Sarah Sharp > <sarah.a.sharp@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > > > I'll roar > > right back, louder, for all the people who lose their voice when they > > get yelled at by top maintainers. I won't be the nice girl anymore. > > That's the spirit. > > Greg has taught you well. You have controlled your fear. Now, release > your anger. Only your hatred can destroy me. > > Come to the dark side, Sarah. We have cookies. But, but, the light side has brownies. Pot brownies that will make everyone feel sleepy and peaceful and possibly hungry. For more pot brownies... Sarah Sharp ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review 2013-07-15 17:46 ` Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-15 17:50 ` Linus Torvalds 2013-07-15 18:04 ` Sarah Sharp 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Linus Torvalds @ 2013-07-15 17:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Steven Rostedt, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, Darren Hart On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:46 AM, Sarah Sharp <sarah.a.sharp@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > But, but, the light side has brownies. Pot brownies that will make > everyone feel sleepy and peaceful and possibly hungry. For more pot > brownies... Hmm. Maybe we should have a BoF at the KS. I'll bring the regular cookies. Linus ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review 2013-07-15 17:50 ` Linus Torvalds @ 2013-07-15 18:04 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-15 18:17 ` Linus Torvalds 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-15 18:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Steven Rostedt, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, Darren Hart On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:50:52AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:46 AM, Sarah Sharp > <sarah.a.sharp@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > > > But, but, the light side has brownies. Pot brownies that will make > > everyone feel sleepy and peaceful and possibly hungry. For more pot > > brownies... > > Hmm. Maybe we should have a BoF at the KS. > > I'll bring the regular cookies. Well, we're not in the Netherlands, so I don't think pot brownies could be smuggled into KS. ;) However, I am serious about this. Linus, you're one of the worst offenders when it comes to verbally abusing people and publicly tearing their emotions apart. http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=135628421403144&w=2 http://marc.info/?l=linux-acpi&m=136157944603147&w=2 I'm not going to put up with that shit any more. Sarah Sharp ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review 2013-07-15 18:04 ` Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-15 18:17 ` Linus Torvalds 2013-07-15 18:46 ` Sarah Sharp 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Linus Torvalds @ 2013-07-15 18:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Steven Rostedt, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, Darren Hart On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Sarah Sharp <sarah.a.sharp@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > However, I am serious about this. Linus, you're one of the worst > offenders when it comes to verbally abusing people and publicly tearing > their emotions apart. Yes. And I do it partly (mostly) because it's who I am, and partly because I honestly despise being subtle or "nice". The fact is, people need to know what my position on things are. And I can't just say "please don't do that", because people won't listen. I say "On the internet, nobody can hear you being subtle", and I mean it. And I definitely am not willing to string people along, either. I've had that happen too - not telling people clearly enough that I don't like their approach, they go on to re-architect something, and get really upset when I am then not willing to take their work. Sarah, first off, I don't have that many tools at hand. Secondly, I simply don't believe in being polite or politically correct. And you can point at all those cultural factors where some cultures are not happy with confrontation (and feel free to make it about gender too - I think that's almost entirely cultural too). And please bring up "cultural sensitivity" while at it. And I'll give you back that same "cultural sensitivity". Please be sensitive to _my_ culture too. Google "management by perkele". Do you really want to oppress a minority? Because Finns are a minority compared to almost any other country. If you want to talk cultural sensitivity, I'll join you. But my culture includes cursing. And some of the above is written tonge-in-cheek, but all of it is also serious. I really fundamentally believe that being honest and open about your emotions about core/process is good. And because it's damn hard to read people over email, I think you need to be *more* honest and *more* open over email. I'm generally nicer in person. Not always. And yes, I'll happily be part of the discussion at the KS. But I think you also need to be aware that your "high horse" isn't necessarily all that high. Linus ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review 2013-07-15 18:17 ` Linus Torvalds @ 2013-07-15 18:46 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-15 19:07 ` Linus Torvalds 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-15 18:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Steven Rostedt, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, Darren Hart On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 11:17:06AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Sarah Sharp > <sarah.a.sharp@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > > > However, I am serious about this. Linus, you're one of the worst > > offenders when it comes to verbally abusing people and publicly tearing > > their emotions apart. > > Yes. And I do it partly (mostly) because it's who I am, and partly > because I honestly despise being subtle or "nice". > > The fact is, people need to know what my position on things are. And I > can't just say "please don't do that", because people won't listen. I > say "On the internet, nobody can hear you being subtle", and I mean > it. > > And I definitely am not willing to string people along, either. I've > had that happen too - not telling people clearly enough that I don't > like their approach, they go on to re-architect something, and get > really upset when I am then not willing to take their work. You can tell developers in no uncertain terms that you're not willing to take their work *without* verbally tearing them apart. You're Linus Torvalds, for crying out loud! I simple, "No, that's a bad idea, stop working on this RIGHT now," is more than enough from you. If it's not, well, those people are just dense and can probably put up with stronger language. > Sarah, first off, I don't have that many tools at hand. Secondly, I > simply don't believe in being polite or politically correct. Bullshit. I've seen you be polite, and explain to clueless maintainers why there's no way you can revert their merge that caused regressions, and ask them to fit it without resorting to tearing them down emotionally: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=136130347127908&w=2 You just don't want to take the time to be polite to everyone. Don't give me the "I'm not polite" card. Go write some documentation about what's acceptable for stable. While you're at it, write some more documentation about why it's impossible for you to revert merges, so maintainers know not to send you crap, or piss away time trying to argue with you that they don't need to fix regressions. When maintainers challenge you, point them to it, and say, "Fix this now." If they protest, then you can bring out the big threats and say, "If you don't fix this, I won't pull from you the next merge window. Go find a backup maintainer that can handle your tree, and train them for the next release. You may need to hand over your maintainership to them." If the maintainer doesn't have sub-maintainers that could take over, that's a problem we need to fix *before* things like this happen. We should discuss which kernel subsystems don't have backups at KS. There are other tools at hand. You just don't use them. > And you can point at all those cultural factors where some cultures > are not happy with confrontation (and feel free to make it about > gender too - I think that's almost entirely cultural too). And please > bring up "cultural sensitivity" while at it. And I'll give you back > that same "cultural sensitivity". Please be sensitive to _my_ culture > too. > > Google "management by perkele". > > Do you really want to oppress a minority? Because Finns are a minority > compared to almost any other country. If you want to talk cultural > sensitivity, I'll join you. But my culture includes cursing. Did I mention minorities here at all? Nope. My only comment was that I wasn't going to be a "nice girl" anymore, which is a comment about my personality, not about the discussion at hand. *No one* deserves to be yelled at IN ALL CAPS in email, or publicly ridiculed. It doesn't matter if they are a minority or not. You are in a position of power. Stop verbally abusing your developers. > And some of the above is written tonge-in-cheek, but all of it is also > serious. I really fundamentally believe that being honest and open > about your emotions about core/process is good. And because it's damn > hard to read people over email, I think you need to be *more* honest > and *more* open over email. I'm generally nicer in person. Not always. *Snort*. Perhaps we haven't interacted very often, but I have never seen you be nice in person at KS. Well, there was that one time you came to me and very quietly explained you had a problem with your USB 3.0 ports, but you came off as "scared to talk to a girl kernel developer" more than "I'm trying to be polite". > And yes, I'll happily be part of the discussion at the KS. But I think > you also need to be aware that your "high horse" isn't necessarily all > that high. Dude, I'm not on a horse here. I'm not asking you to change your communication styles in order to help minorities. I'm not some crazy feminist ranting about cooties on Google+. I'm trying to improve the kernel mailing lists for all developers. We can give negative technical feedback without verbal abuse. Sarah Sharp ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review 2013-07-15 18:46 ` Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-15 19:07 ` Linus Torvalds 2013-07-15 19:53 ` Sarah Sharp 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Linus Torvalds @ 2013-07-15 19:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Steven Rostedt, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, Darren Hart On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Sarah Sharp <sarah.a.sharp@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > Bullshit. I've seen you be polite, and explain to clueless maintainers > why there's no way you can revert their merge that caused regressions, > and ask them to fit it without resorting to tearing them down > emotionally: Oh, I'll be polite when it's called for. But when people who know better send me crap, I'll curse at them. I suspect you'll notice me cursing *way* more at top developers than random people on the list. I expect more from them, and conversely I'll be a lot more upset when they do something that I really think was not great. For example, my latest cursing explosion was for the x86 maintainers, and it comes from the fact that I *know* they know to do better. The x86 tip pulls have generally been through way more testing than most other pulls I get (not just compiling, but even booting randconfigs etc). So when an x86 pull request comes in that clearly missed that expected level of quality, I go to town. Similarly, you will see fireworks if some long-term maintainer makes excuses for breaking user space etc. That will make me go into incoherent rages. The "polite Linus" example that you point to? That was a maintainer asking for direction for when things went wrong and *before* sending me something dubious. Of course I'm polite then. Sarah, I don't have Tourettes syndrome. You seem to think that my cursing is uncontrolled and random. I argue that it has causes. Big difference. Linus ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review 2013-07-15 19:07 ` Linus Torvalds @ 2013-07-15 19:53 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-15 20:41 ` Sarah Sharp 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-15 19:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Steven Rostedt, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, Darren Hart On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 12:07:56PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Sarah Sharp > <sarah.a.sharp@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > > > Bullshit. I've seen you be polite, and explain to clueless maintainers > > why there's no way you can revert their merge that caused regressions, > > and ask them to fit it without resorting to tearing them down > > emotionally: > > Oh, I'll be polite when it's called for. > > But when people who know better send me crap, I'll curse at them. > > I suspect you'll notice me cursing *way* more at top developers than > random people on the list. I expect more from them, and conversely > I'll be a lot more upset when they do something that I really think > was not great. > > For example, my latest cursing explosion was for the x86 maintainers, > and it comes from the fact that I *know* they know to do better. The > x86 tip pulls have generally been through way more testing than most > other pulls I get (not just compiling, but even booting randconfigs > etc). So when an x86 pull request comes in that clearly missed that > expected level of quality, I go to town. Good lord. So anyone that is one of your "top maintainers" could be exposed to your verbal abuse just because they "should have known better"? You know what the definition of an abuser is? Someone that seeks out victims that they know will "just take it" and keep the abuse "between the two of them". They pick victims that won't fight back or report the abuse. > Similarly, you will see fireworks if some long-term maintainer makes > excuses for breaking user space etc. That will make me go into > incoherent rages. > > The "polite Linus" example that you point to? That was a maintainer > asking for direction for when things went wrong and *before* sending > me something dubious. Of course I'm polite then. > > Sarah, I don't have Tourettes syndrome. You seem to think that my > cursing is uncontrolled and random. I argue that it has causes. Big > difference. It does not matter if your cursing fits have causes. The fact is that if you misjudge someone's emotional state for the day, you yelling at them is not productive. In karate, or any other sport, if your opponent is motionless on the floor, you stop. You can't see the person you're emailing. You can't see if the first conversation-disabling blow has completely knocked them out. You can't see if you've misjudged their mental strength for the day and completely wiped out their ability to use their brain to correct the technical mistake you're trying to get them to fix. Ask them to fix their mistake. If they protest, then lay into them. If you *know* they don't take verbal abuse well, don't. Let's get this personal baggage out of the way right now, before anyone else brings it up: I've been through verbal abuse before. I won't take that shit from you, or any of the other Linux kernel developers. Tell me, politely, what I have done wrong, and I will fix it. You don't need to SHOUT, call me names, or tell me to SHUT THE FUCK UP! I'm not the only one that won't take verbal abuse. Stop abusing your developers. Sarah Sharp ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review 2013-07-15 19:53 ` Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-15 20:41 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-15 21:50 ` Linus Torvalds 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-15 20:41 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Steven Rostedt, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, Darren Hart On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 12:53:16PM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > Good lord. So anyone that is one of your "top maintainers" could be > exposed to your verbal abuse just because they "should have known > better"? > > You know what the definition of an abuser is? Someone that seeks out > victims that they know will "just take it" and keep the abuse "between > the two of them". They pick victims that won't fight back or report the > abuse. Oh, FFS, I just called out on private email for "playing the victim card". I will repeat: this is not just about me, or other minorities. I should not have to ask for professional behavior on the mailing lists. Professional behavior should be the default. "The standard you walk past is the standard you accept." http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/unlikely-feminist-hero-army-chiefs-video-message-draws-plaudits-20130614-2o86b.html "Those who think that it is ok to behave in a way that demeans or exploits their colleagues have no place in this army. If that does not suit you, then get out. The same goes for those that think that toughness is built on humiliating others. Every one of us is responsible for the culture and reputation of our Army, and the environment in which we work. If you become aware of any individual degrading another, then show moral courage and take a stand against it." > In karate, or any other sport, if your opponent is motionless on the > floor, you stop. You can't see the person you're emailing. You can't > see if the first conversation-disabling blow has completely knocked them > out. You can't see if you've misjudged their mental strength for the > day and completely wiped out their ability to use their brain to correct > the technical mistake you're trying to get them to fix. > > Ask them to fix their mistake. If they protest, then lay into them. If > you *know* they don't take verbal abuse well, don't. Sarah Sharp ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review 2013-07-15 20:41 ` Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-15 21:50 ` Linus Torvalds 2013-07-15 22:08 ` [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) Steven Rostedt 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Linus Torvalds @ 2013-07-15 21:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Steven Rostedt, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, Darren Hart On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Sarah Sharp <sarah.a.sharp@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > Oh, FFS, I just called out on private email for "playing the victim > card". I will repeat: this is not just about me, or other minorities. > I should not have to ask for professional behavior on the mailing lists. > Professional behavior should be the default. Bullshit. The thing is, the "victim card" is exactly about trying to enforce your particular expectations on others, and trying to do so in a very particular way. It's the old "think of the children" argument. And it's bogus. Calling things "professional" is just more of the same - trying to enforce some kind of convention on others by trying to claim that it's the only acceptable way. [ Since you seem to want to keep this in public, I'll just cut-and-paste from my reply, so you have already seen this part of my argument, it's only slightly edited because now I'm no longer typing on my cellphone ] The thing is, different people act and react differently. On both sides. And I think we should recognize that and also *allow* for that. And sometimes it means, for example, that people interact primarily with certain people that they like more - because they are a better "fit". I think we actually do it very naturally, simply because we are human, and this is how people interact in real life too. Sometimes we do it consciously - the way we have people at various companies that act as go-betweens - but most of the time we do it just because humans are all about social interactions and we don't even think about what we do and why. For example, you work mostly through Greg. I don't think either of you *planned* it that way, but it's likely because you guys work well together. See what I'm saying? People are different. I'm not polite, and I get upset easily but generally don't hold a grudge - I have these explosive emails. And that works well for some people. And it probably doesn't work well with you. And you know what? That's fine. Not everybody had to get along or work well with each other. But the fact that it doesn't work with you doesn't make it "wrong". This isn't all that different from working around language issues etc by having certain people work as in-betweens on that front. And where we differ is in thinking either side has to necessarily change. You think people need to act "nicer". While I think it's *natural* that people have different behavior - and different expectations. We all have issues somewhere and don't all like each other. There are certain people I refuse to work with, for example. They may be good engineers, but they just aren't people I can work with. And hey, I don't actually think we've personally even had any problems. And I realize that you may react very strongly and get nervous about us having problems, but realistically, do you actually expect to like all the other kernel engineers? And equally importantly, not everybody has to like you, or necessarily think they have to be liked by you. OK? So as far as I'm concerned, the discussion is about "how to work together DESPITE people being different". Not about trying to make everybody please each other. Because I can pretty much guarantee that I'll continue cursing. To me, the discussion would be about how to work together despite these kinds of cultural differences, not about "how do we make everybody nice and sing songs sound the campfire" Do you think you might be interested in *that* kind of discussion instead of the "you are abusing me" kind of discussion? Because if you want me to "act professional", I can tell you that I'm not interested. I'm sitting in my home office wearign a bathrobe. The same way I'm not going to start wearing ties, I'm *also* not going to buy into the fake politeness, the lying, the office politics and backstabbing, the passive aggressiveness, and the buzzwords. Because THAT is what "acting professionally" results in: people resort to all kinds of really nasty things because they are forced to act out their normal urges in unnatural ways. Linus ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) 2013-07-15 21:50 ` Linus Torvalds @ 2013-07-15 22:08 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-15 22:36 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-15 22:38 ` [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) Linus Torvalds 0 siblings, 2 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-15 22:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Sarah Sharp, Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, Darren Hart, ksummit-2013-discuss On Mon, 2013-07-15 at 14:50 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Sarah Sharp > <sarah.a.sharp@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > > > Oh, FFS, I just called out on private email for "playing the victim > > card". I will repeat: this is not just about me, or other minorities. > > I should not have to ask for professional behavior on the mailing lists. > > Professional behavior should be the default. > > Bullshit. > Can we please make this into a Kernel Summit discussion. I highly doubt we would solve anything, but it certainly would be a fun segment to watch :-) -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) 2013-07-15 22:08 ` [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-15 22:36 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-15 23:49 ` Darren Hart 2013-07-16 7:32 ` [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) David Lang 2013-07-15 22:38 ` [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) Linus Torvalds 1 sibling, 2 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-15 22:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, Darren Hart, ksummit-2013-discuss, Willy Tarreau On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 06:08:29PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Mon, 2013-07-15 at 14:50 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Sarah Sharp > > <sarah.a.sharp@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > > > > > Oh, FFS, I just called out on private email for "playing the victim > > > card". I will repeat: this is not just about me, or other minorities. > > > I should not have to ask for professional behavior on the mailing lists. > > > Professional behavior should be the default. > > > > Bullshit. > > > > Can we please make this into a Kernel Summit discussion. I highly doubt > we would solve anything, but it certainly would be a fun segment to > watch :-) I agree, KS is where this conversation should be taking place. Attendees for this conversation (so far) should be Greg KH, Linus, Darren Hart, Steve Rostedt, Willy Tarreau, and me. > > So as far as I'm concerned, the discussion is about "how to work > > together DESPITE people being different". Not about trying to make > > everybody please each other. Because I can pretty much guarantee that > > I'll continue cursing. To me, the discussion would be about how to > > work together despite these kinds of cultural differences, not about > > "how do we make everybody nice and sing songs sound the campfire" > > > > Do you think you might be interested in *that* kind of discussion > > instead of the "you are abusing me" kind of discussion? > > > > Because if you want me to "act professional", I can tell you that I'm > > not interested. I'm sitting in my home office wearign a bathrobe. The > > same way I'm not going to start wearing ties, I'm *also* not going to > > buy into the fake politeness, the lying, the office politics and > > backstabbing, the passive aggressiveness, and the buzzwords. Because > > THAT is what "acting professionally" results in: people resort to all > > kinds of really nasty things because they are forced to act out their > > normal urges in unnatural ways. Yes, let's move this conversation into the "how to work together DESPITE people being different" realm. I would be happy to have that discussion. As Linus said, some people work together better than others. Some people have different expectations of appropriate ways to interact with co-workers. Sometimes that means that people only work with certain other co-workers, like Greg and I. The people who want to work together in a civil manner should get together and create a "Kernel maintainer's code of conduct" that outlines what they expect from fellow kernel developers. The people who want to continue acting "unprofessionally" should document what behaviors set off their cursing streaks, so that others can avoid that behavior. Somewhere in the middle is the community behavior all developers can thrive in. Some people won't agree with everything in that document. The point is, they don't have to agree. They can read the document, figure out what the community expects, and figure out whether they can modify their behavior to match. If they are unwilling to change, they simply don't have to work with the developers who have signed it. Perhaps a trusted third party could take a stab at a first draft of this document? Greg KH? Steve Rostedt? Darren Hart? Sarah Sharp ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) 2013-07-15 22:36 ` Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-15 23:49 ` Darren Hart 2013-07-16 2:43 ` [ATTEND] How to act on LKML Chris Ball 2013-07-16 7:32 ` [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) David Lang 1 sibling, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Darren Hart @ 2013-07-15 23:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: Steven Rostedt, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, ksummit-2013-discuss, Willy Tarreau On Mon, 2013-07-15 at 15:36 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 06:08:29PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Mon, 2013-07-15 at 14:50 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Sarah Sharp > > > <sarah.a.sharp@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Oh, FFS, I just called out on private email for "playing the victim > > > > card". I will repeat: this is not just about me, or other minorities. > > > > I should not have to ask for professional behavior on the mailing lists. > > > > Professional behavior should be the default. > > > > > > Bullshit. > > > > > > > Can we please make this into a Kernel Summit discussion. I highly doubt > > we would solve anything, but it certainly would be a fun segment to > > watch :-) > > I agree, KS is where this conversation should be taking place. > Attendees for this conversation (so far) should be Greg KH, Linus, > Darren Hart, Steve Rostedt, Willy Tarreau, and me. > > > > So as far as I'm concerned, the discussion is about "how to work > > > together DESPITE people being different". Not about trying to make > > > everybody please each other. Because I can pretty much guarantee that > > > I'll continue cursing. To me, the discussion would be about how to > > > work together despite these kinds of cultural differences, not about > > > "how do we make everybody nice and sing songs sound the campfire" > > > > > > Do you think you might be interested in *that* kind of discussion > > > instead of the "you are abusing me" kind of discussion? > > > > > > Because if you want me to "act professional", I can tell you that I'm > > > not interested. I'm sitting in my home office wearign a bathrobe. The > > > same way I'm not going to start wearing ties, I'm *also* not going to > > > buy into the fake politeness, the lying, the office politics and > > > backstabbing, the passive aggressiveness, and the buzzwords. Because > > > THAT is what "acting professionally" results in: people resort to all > > > kinds of really nasty things because they are forced to act out their > > > normal urges in unnatural ways. > > Yes, let's move this conversation into the "how to work together DESPITE > people being different" realm. I would be happy to have that > discussion. As Linus said, some people work together better than > others. Some people have different expectations of appropriate ways to > interact with co-workers. Sometimes that means that people only work > with certain other co-workers, like Greg and I. > > The people who want to work together in a civil manner should get > together and create a "Kernel maintainer's code of conduct" that > outlines what they expect from fellow kernel developers. The people who > want to continue acting "unprofessionally" should document what > behaviors set off their cursing streaks, so that others can avoid that > behavior. Somewhere in the middle is the community behavior all > developers can thrive in. > > Some people won't agree with everything in that document. The point is, > they don't have to agree. They can read the document, figure out what > the community expects, and figure out whether they can modify their > behavior to match. If they are unwilling to change, they simply don't > have to work with the developers who have signed it. > > Perhaps a trusted third party could take a stab at a first draft of this > document? Greg KH? Steve Rostedt? Darren Hart? > Well, I admit this wasn't the contribution I've been working toward for my first KS invite, but if people think this would be valuable, I'm up for helping out where I can. Now are we talking more about a code of conduct or a process document. I'm more likely to help out on the latter, as the former often raises my hackles a bit. I'm fine with a few lines in the process document instructing people on the pitfalls of written communication and to keep it civil, but I will not enumerate the seven words you can't say on television as bad words that thou shalt no use. Such a document would be largely ignored, and indeed, may have the opposite of the desired result :-) I do believe that someone from the intended audience of a document should be the one to write the first draft (or they should be among the reviewers if the authority drafts the document). For instance, I believe I would be able to document how to work with -tip or -stable as an individual contributor. I would not be a good candidate for writing the "how to be a lieutenant to Linus" because I am neither Linus nor one of his lieutenants. I concern myself with Thomas, Ingo, Peter Z., and Greg K-H, and increasingly David Miller, but I don't worry about Linus because I trust these people to do that properly and I trust that their rules are the ones I need to follow: if it's good enough for them, it will make upstream eventually. I will re-iterate one more time though, that personally, I am much more interested in making it clear what sets people (OK, Linus) off in a document like stable_kernel_rules where we can point violators to. A document which eliminates the need to search LKML or -stable for similar patches to determine the preferred process of the month. Where possible, this would (IMO) be the default policy document and subsystem maintainers would only deviate from it for very good reasons. For example, having different comment formatting rules in checkpatch for different subsystems strikes me as cruel and unusual. If someone goes on a tirade for a violation that is not documented, the blame falls on them IMHO. If it's documented, a newcomer gets a referral, a repeat offender has opened themselves up to stronger forms of persuasion. -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center Yocto Project - Technical Lead - Linux Kernel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-15 23:49 ` Darren Hart @ 2013-07-16 2:43 ` Chris Ball 2013-07-16 3:06 ` Steven Rostedt 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Chris Ball @ 2013-07-16 2:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Darren Hart Cc: Sarah Sharp, Steven Rostedt, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, ksummit-2013-discuss, Willy Tarreau Hi, On Tue, Jul 16 2013, Darren Hart wrote: > On Mon, 2013-07-15 at 15:36 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: >> The people who want to work together in a civil manner should get >> together and create a "Kernel maintainer's code of conduct" that >> outlines what they expect from fellow kernel developers. The people who >> want to continue acting "unprofessionally" should document what >> behaviors set off their cursing streaks, so that others can avoid that >> behavior. Somewhere in the middle is the community behavior all >> developers can thrive in. >> >> Some people won't agree with everything in that document. The point is, >> they don't have to agree. They can read the document, figure out what >> the community expects, and figure out whether they can modify their >> behavior to match. If they are unwilling to change, they simply don't >> have to work with the developers who have signed it. >> >> Perhaps a trusted third party could take a stab at a first draft of this >> document? Greg KH? Steve Rostedt? Darren Hart? > > [..] > I do believe that someone from the intended audience of a document > should be the one to write the first draft (or they should be among the > reviewers if the authority drafts the document). For instance, I > believe I would be able to document how to work with -tip or -stable as > an individual contributor. I would not be a good candidate for writing > the "how to be a lieutenant to Linus" because I am neither Linus nor > one of his lieutenants. Here's a simple statement that I hope many kernel developers would sign up for -- I'd be happy to make it for the subsystem I maintain: * If there's something wrong with your patch, I will critique the code respectfully, without personal attacks or public humiliation. I'd like other developers to treat me this way too, but perhaps a good way to get started is to first come up with a statement of how we'd like to treat others, and then start collecting signatories to it. Does that sound like a good idea? Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball <cjb@laptop.org> <http://printf.net/> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-16 2:43 ` [ATTEND] How to act on LKML Chris Ball @ 2013-07-16 3:06 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-16 3:36 ` H. Peter Anvin 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-16 3:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Chris Ball Cc: Darren Hart, Sarah Sharp, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, ksummit-2013-discuss, Willy Tarreau On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 03:43 +0100, Chris Ball wrote: > Hi, > I'd like other developers to treat me this way too, but perhaps a good > way to get started is to first come up with a statement of how we'd > like to treat others, and then start collecting signatories to it. > Does that sound like a good idea? "collecting signatories"? Like getting signatures from kids that say they will remain virgins till they marry? In the end, they all end up getting screwed. No, we don't need any pact to sign. I'm not sure this is really that much of an issue. Yes, Linus likes to rant, but that's basically his trademark. There's a few other grumpy kernel developers that can be a bit heavy handed too. But really, if you don't want to be cursed at, here's some pretty easy instructions to follow. 1) Read what a maintainer tells you twice. If you are pointed to a document, read that twice. 2) If you don't understand what the maintainer says, ask what he/she meant. 3) Be honest! Don't try to pull that you know something that you really don't. 4) If you change existing infrastructure. Prove that your change is better. And not just on your box, on many other boxes. Post RFCs asking others to test, and give feedback. Don't claim its better till the numbers are in. 5) Don't be afraid to admit you don't know something. I find people that tell you what they don't know have much more integrity than people that keep telling you what they do know. I don't see any kernel developer cursing at someone because they just feel like cursing at someone. It's usually caused by someone not being honest with themselves or the developers they are dealing with. Or simply not listening to what they are being told. Linus's point is that he wants to be honest, and cursing is his way of giving you the most direct way to understand how he honestly feels. -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-16 3:06 ` Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-16 3:36 ` H. Peter Anvin 2013-07-16 15:49 ` Stefano Stabellini 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: H. Peter Anvin @ 2013-07-16 3:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Chris Ball, Darren Hart, Sarah Sharp, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, ksummit-2013-discuss, Willy Tarreau On 07/15/2013 08:06 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > Linus's point is that he wants to be honest, and cursing is his way of > giving you the most direct way to understand how he honestly feels. > What I don't get about anything of this is that I have always found Linus' being hyper-obviously over the top sarcastic when he goes on a rant. There is usually plenty of context to derive that from, too, even if you haven't seen him in person enough to virtually hear the smirk in his voice. This is a form of humor more than anything else, and at least I find it utterly impossible to be offended by it. As the main target of the rant this weekend, I (a) chuckled, and (b) said "I think I need to do some damage control". -hpa ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-16 3:36 ` H. Peter Anvin @ 2013-07-16 15:49 ` Stefano Stabellini 2013-07-16 16:16 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-17 8:04 ` Dan Carpenter 0 siblings, 2 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Stefano Stabellini @ 2013-07-16 15:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: H. Peter Anvin Cc: Steven Rostedt, Chris Ball, Darren Hart, Sarah Sharp, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, ksummit-2013-discuss, Willy Tarreau On Mon, 15 Jul 2013, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 07/15/2013 08:06 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > > Linus's point is that he wants to be honest, and cursing is his way of > > giving you the most direct way to understand how he honestly feels. > > > > What I don't get about anything of this is that I have always found > Linus' being hyper-obviously over the top sarcastic when he goes on a > rant. There is usually plenty of context to derive that from, too, even > if you haven't seen him in person enough to virtually hear the smirk in > his voice. This is a form of humor more than anything else, and at > least I find it utterly impossible to be offended by it. As the main > target of the rant this weekend, I (a) chuckled, and (b) said "I think I > need to do some damage control". I agree with Sarah. I have been hacking in several different Open Source communities during the last few years, including qemu-devel, xen-devel, linux-arm and the lkml of course. The etiquette on the lkml is by far the roughest of them all. It's the "bad neighborhood with guns" of the Open Source world. You never know when you are going to get a bullet, but sooner or later you'll get one. I think that it's hurting Linux and in particular it's hurting attracting new talents. Not just devs for hire but people passionate about what they do and eager to become more involved in the project. I met more than one good ex-Linux hacker that decided to move to do other things because of this. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-16 15:49 ` Stefano Stabellini @ 2013-07-16 16:16 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-16 16:58 ` Stefano Stabellini 2013-07-17 8:04 ` Dan Carpenter 1 sibling, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-16 16:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Stefano Stabellini Cc: H. Peter Anvin, Chris Ball, Darren Hart, Sarah Sharp, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, ksummit-2013-discuss, Willy Tarreau On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 16:49 +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > I have been hacking in several different Open Source communities during > the last few years, including qemu-devel, xen-devel, linux-arm and the > lkml of course. > > The etiquette on the lkml is by far the roughest of them all. It's the It's also the largest of them all. > "bad neighborhood with guns" of the Open Source world. You never know > when you are going to get a bullet, but sooner or later you'll get one. It just seems that way as it is so large. LKML has the most people and will also have the biggest conflict in personalities. It just goes with the territory. > > I think that it's hurting Linux and in particular it's hurting > attracting new talents. Then why do we have the largest # of developers than any other Open Source project? > Not just devs for hire but people passionate > about what they do and eager to become more involved in the project. > I met more than one good ex-Linux hacker that decided to move to do > other things because of this. Honestly, I think LKML over the years has become more tame. Yeah, back in 2005 it was rather harsh, but I don't really see that anymore. I don't see the nasty flame wars going on. Everything seems to be focused more on the technical side, and there's really very little personal attacks out there. Sure, with 15,000 emails a month, you get a few. And Linus will get fed up and burst. But they are really few and far between. And sometimes, a Linus burst gets things moving along much faster than being "professional". You think ARM would have gotten their act together as quick as they did if Linus didn't curse them out and threaten to stop pulling their crap? -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-16 16:16 ` Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-16 16:58 ` Stefano Stabellini 2013-07-16 19:31 ` H. Peter Anvin 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Stefano Stabellini @ 2013-07-16 16:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Stefano Stabellini, H. Peter Anvin, Chris Ball, Darren Hart, Sarah Sharp, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, ksummit-2013-discuss, Willy Tarreau On Tue, 16 Jul 2013, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 16:49 +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > > I have been hacking in several different Open Source communities during > > the last few years, including qemu-devel, xen-devel, linux-arm and the > > lkml of course. > > > > The etiquette on the lkml is by far the roughest of them all. It's the > > It's also the largest of them all. > > > "bad neighborhood with guns" of the Open Source world. You never know > > when you are going to get a bullet, but sooner or later you'll get one. > > It just seems that way as it is so large. LKML has the most people and > will also have the biggest conflict in personalities. It just goes with > the territory. Even though the LKML is probably the largest Open Source community, there are other groups out there of similar size. I don't believe that in order to scale up we need to be like this. > > I think that it's hurting Linux and in particular it's hurting > > attracting new talents. > > Then why do we have the largest # of developers than any other Open > Source project? Because Linux is the most widely used kernel, it's everywhere from embedded devices to supercomputers. Many different companies make a business on Linux and pay people to work on it (not FreeBSD or NetBSD). But that's different from what I was saying below. Also not all the sub-groups within the kernel development circles work this way. Or maybe there are just enough brilliant kernel developers that don't care. > > Not just devs for hire but people passionate > > about what they do and eager to become more involved in the project. > > I met more than one good ex-Linux hacker that decided to move to do > > other things because of this. > > Honestly, I think LKML over the years has become more tame. Yeah, back > in 2005 it was rather harsh, but I don't really see that anymore. I > don't see the nasty flame wars going on. Everything seems to be focused > more on the technical side, and there's really very little personal > attacks out there. Sure, with 15,000 emails a month, you get a few. And > Linus will get fed up and burst. But they are really few and far > between. And sometimes, a Linus burst gets things moving along much > faster than being "professional". You think ARM would have gotten their > act together as quick as they did if Linus didn't curse them out and > threaten to stop pulling their crap? I think there is a way to get the point across without cursing. One can be clear and decisive without "bursting". It's easy to mistake cursing on the quality of the code for a personal attack. When HPA wrote "I find it utterly impossible to be offended by it", that might be true for Linus' rants and I also find them humorous sometimes. But unfortunately this kind of behavior is by no means limited to Linus and it's easy to misunderstand, especially when you don't know the person. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-16 16:58 ` Stefano Stabellini @ 2013-07-16 19:31 ` H. Peter Anvin 2013-07-17 9:17 ` Stefano Stabellini 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: H. Peter Anvin @ 2013-07-16 19:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Stefano Stabellini Cc: Steven Rostedt, Chris Ball, Darren Hart, Sarah Sharp, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, ksummit-2013-discuss, Willy Tarreau On 07/16/2013 09:58 AM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > Because Linux is the most widely used kernel, it's everywhere from > embedded devices to supercomputers. > Many different companies make a business on Linux and pay people to work > on it (not FreeBSD or NetBSD). But that's different from what I was > saying below. Also not all the sub-groups within the kernel development > circles work this way. > I think you have an inverse causal relationship here. Linux took off in a way that the other OSS operating systems didn't, and several of them had started earlier and with way more funding available. You really have to think about why we are not running Hurd, or any of the various *BSDs, and instead Linus' "not big and professional like GNU" hack. In my opinion it was because the Linux community was in fact the most open and welcoming of the Open Source communities around. > When HPA wrote "I find it utterly impossible to be offended by it", that > might be true for Linus' rants and I also find them humorous sometimes. > But unfortunately this kind of behavior is by no means limited to Linus > and it's easy to misunderstand, especially when you don't know the > person. There seem to be a fair number of people who think they can imitate Linus' style but do so without understanding the subtle aspects about how to apply it. -hpa ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-16 19:31 ` H. Peter Anvin @ 2013-07-17 9:17 ` Stefano Stabellini 2013-07-17 14:01 ` Felipe Contreras 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Stefano Stabellini @ 2013-07-17 9:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: H. Peter Anvin Cc: Stefano Stabellini, Steven Rostedt, Chris Ball, Darren Hart, Sarah Sharp, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, ksummit-2013-discuss, Willy Tarreau On Tue, 16 Jul 2013, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 07/16/2013 09:58 AM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > > > Because Linux is the most widely used kernel, it's everywhere from > > embedded devices to supercomputers. > > Many different companies make a business on Linux and pay people to work > > on it (not FreeBSD or NetBSD). But that's different from what I was > > saying below. Also not all the sub-groups within the kernel development > > circles work this way. > > > > I think you have an inverse causal relationship here. > > Linux took off in a way that the other OSS operating systems didn't, and > several of them had started earlier and with way more funding available. > > You really have to think about why we are not running Hurd, or any of > the various *BSDs, and instead Linus' "not big and professional like > GNU" hack. In my opinion it was because the Linux community was in fact > the most open and welcoming of the Open Source communities around. Then it's the time to ask ourselves: is it still like this? > > When HPA wrote "I find it utterly impossible to be offended by it", that > > might be true for Linus' rants and I also find them humorous sometimes. > > But unfortunately this kind of behavior is by no means limited to Linus > > and it's easy to misunderstand, especially when you don't know the > > person. > > There seem to be a fair number of people who think they can imitate > Linus' style but do so without understanding the subtle aspects about > how to apply it. Right, this is actually the main point I wanted to make. Linus' outbursts are not the problem per se because Linus tends to attack the code rather than the people and does so when he has a point, without straying from the conversation. However they set up an example that others try to imitate, without the same thoughtfulness. I guess this is the price to pay for being a role model ;-) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 9:17 ` Stefano Stabellini @ 2013-07-17 14:01 ` Felipe Contreras 2013-07-17 14:40 ` Sarah Sharp 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Felipe Contreras @ 2013-07-17 14:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Stefano Stabellini Cc: H. Peter Anvin, Steven Rostedt, Chris Ball, Darren Hart, Sarah Sharp, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, ksummit-2013-discuss, Willy Tarreau On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 4:17 AM, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> wrote: > On Tue, 16 Jul 2013, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> Linux took off in a way that the other OSS operating systems didn't, and >> several of them had started earlier and with way more funding available. >> >> You really have to think about why we are not running Hurd, or any of >> the various *BSDs, and instead Linus' "not big and professional like >> GNU" hack. In my opinion it was because the Linux community was in fact >> the most open and welcoming of the Open Source communities around. > > Then it's the time to ask ourselves: is it still like this? Yes it is. Linux is the only project I'm aware of where I know my patches will be accepted if they are technically good, despite any personal bullshit, not even Git allows this. The fact that one can be open and honest, and discussion is welcome (as long as it's constructive), in this list is one of the reasons why Linux is so successful. To me, Linux is an oasis among a desert of open source projects where technical merit is not as important as "being nice", and that's why those projects rot and eventually fork, and Linux would not. I know you think "being nice" is better, but do you actually have any evidence for this, or is it just wishful thinking? If you don't have hard evidence, then I'd say you have to admit it's simply your opinion, and I don't think the most successful software project in history should change one if it's core principles simply because *you* think it should. Cheers. -- Felipe Contreras ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 14:01 ` Felipe Contreras @ 2013-07-17 14:40 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-17 15:12 ` Felipe Contreras 2013-07-17 22:02 ` Guenter Roeck 0 siblings, 2 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-17 14:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Felipe Contreras Cc: Stefano Stabellini, H. Peter Anvin, Steven Rostedt, Chris Ball, Darren Hart, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, ksummit-2013-discuss, Willy Tarreau On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 09:01:02AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: > I know you think "being nice" is better, but do you actually have any > evidence for this, or is it just wishful thinking? If you don't have > hard evidence, then I'd say you have to admit it's simply your > opinion, and I don't think the most successful software project in > history should change one if it's core principles simply because *you* > think it should. I haven't shared any "hard evidence" that civility works better in open source projects, because to do so would be to bring gender politics into the equation. I don't want to make this into a gendered issue, but since you want hard numbers, I will. Go look at Dreamwidth, the open source Livejournal fork. It has a good code of conduct, so developers are civil to each other. They encourage all patch submissions, and take the time to work with people who don't understand their community rules. The result: 75% of their developers are women. If you give a flying fuck about diversity, and want to attract women to your open source project, your developers need to be civil, and not verbally abuse each other. Sarah Sharp ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 14:40 ` Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-17 15:12 ` Felipe Contreras 2013-07-19 12:08 ` Ingo Molnar 2013-07-17 22:02 ` Guenter Roeck 1 sibling, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Felipe Contreras @ 2013-07-17 15:12 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: Stefano Stabellini, H. Peter Anvin, Steven Rostedt, Chris Ball, Darren Hart, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, ksummit-2013-discuss, Willy Tarreau On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 9:40 AM, Sarah Sharp <sarah.a.sharp@linux.intel.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 09:01:02AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: >> I know you think "being nice" is better, but do you actually have any >> evidence for this, or is it just wishful thinking? If you don't have >> hard evidence, then I'd say you have to admit it's simply your >> opinion, and I don't think the most successful software project in >> history should change one if it's core principles simply because *you* >> think it should. > > I haven't shared any "hard evidence" that civility works better in open > source projects, because to do so would be to bring gender politics into > the equation. I don't want to make this into a gendered issue, but > since you want hard numbers, I will. > > Go look at Dreamwidth, the open source Livejournal fork. It has a good > code of conduct, so developers are civil to each other. They encourage > all patch submissions, and take the time to work with people who don't > understand their community rules. > > The result: 75% of their developers are women. If you give a flying > fuck about diversity, and want to attract women to your open source > project, your developers need to be civil, and not verbally abuse each > other. First of all, correlation doesn't imply causation. Second, that's *one* data-point, it can hardly be considered hard evidence. Anyway, through the discussion it has been established that swearing is rare, most of often directed to the code, and on exceptional occasions directed to people, when they *deserve* it. And you seem to be implying that women can't tolerate that, so a change needs to be made in order to attract more women to the project. Is that correct? Personally I don't believe that. Essentially every other open source project out there, except the Linux kernel, has some kind code of conduct, whether it's implicit or explicit, and yet they don't have many developer women either. But fine, let's suppose what you say it's true. As Linus already pointed out, not everybody has to work with everybody. You don't like Linus' style, you don't *need* to work with Linus. If, as you say, women don't have such a thick skin, a claim that I reject (until I can see the hard evidence), and they need a civil environment, then they can stick with the maintainers that are softer, and I know there are many of them. Can they not? Personally I think they can handle criticism like any of the men in this mailing list do. Unless you royally screw up like Mauro did, you would be fine. -- Felipe Contreras ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 15:12 ` Felipe Contreras @ 2013-07-19 12:08 ` Ingo Molnar 2013-07-19 18:42 ` Felipe Contreras 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Ingo Molnar @ 2013-07-19 12:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Felipe Contreras Cc: Sarah Sharp, Stefano Stabellini, H. Peter Anvin, Steven Rostedt, Chris Ball, Darren Hart, Linus Torvalds, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, ksummit-2013-discuss, Willy Tarreau * Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote: > [...] > > Anyway, through the discussion it has been established that swearing is > rare, most of often directed to the code, and on exceptional occasions > directed to people, when they *deserve* it. And you seem to be implying > that women can't tolerate that, so a change needs to be made in order to > attract more women to the project. Is that correct? While I don't talk for Sarah, the way you have put it is broadly correct (although your formulation is adversarial and leading): most communities dominated by women are hugely offputting to males and communities dominated by males are hugely offputting to women. Open communities dominated by one gender (males in most cases) that want to essentially double their creative brain capacity by attracting the other gender are well advised to try to figure out a solution to that problem. > Personally I don't believe that. Essentially every other open source > project out there, except the Linux kernel, has some kind code of > conduct, whether it's implicit or explicit, and yet they don't have many > developer women either. But fine, let's suppose what you say it's true. Code of conduct is unfortunately not enough - there's many conscious and subconscious dimensions to a community that make it offputting to one gender or the other and once a community becomes a mono-culture by one gender (due to historic gender bias or due to sheer luck) it's (very) hard to change it. > As Linus already pointed out, not everybody has to work with everybody. That's not the point though, the point is to potentially roughly double the creative brain capacity of the Linux kernel project. Even if you don't care about gender fairness, that kind of bona fide benefit to the project is worth a try or two I think ... Thanks, Ingo ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-19 12:08 ` Ingo Molnar @ 2013-07-19 18:42 ` Felipe Contreras 2013-07-19 18:56 ` Steven Rostedt ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Felipe Contreras @ 2013-07-19 18:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Sarah Sharp, Stefano Stabellini, H. Peter Anvin, Steven Rostedt, Chris Ball, Darren Hart, Linus Torvalds, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, ksummit-2013-discuss, Willy Tarreau On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote: > > * Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote: >> As Linus already pointed out, not everybody has to work with everybody. > > That's not the point though, the point is to potentially roughly double > the creative brain capacity of the Linux kernel project. Unfortunately that's impossible; we all know there aren't as many women programmers as there are men. So there's absolutely *nothing* the Linux kernel can do to double the creative brain capacity of the Linux kernel project (at least with respect to women). At best that is a societal/academic/professional issue, not a Linux issue. > Even if you don't care about gender fairness, that kind of bona fide > benefit to the project is worth a try or two I think ... I think the Linux kernel is perfectly gender-fair, in fact, you don't even need to state you gender; you would be treated the same either way. But you are avoiding the question as well; do you think there's something fundamentally different about the female brain that makes them more susceptible to personal attacks? If yes, where is the scientific evidence? If there's no evidence, then it's merely an opinion that is not shared by others (e.g. me), and if no, then whatever the men can take, the women can take as well, so nothing needs to change. -- Felipe Contreras ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-19 18:42 ` Felipe Contreras @ 2013-07-19 18:56 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-19 20:33 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] " James Bottomley 2013-07-19 20:03 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2013-07-20 17:04 ` Ben Hutchings 2 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-19 18:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Felipe Contreras Cc: Ingo Molnar, Sarah Sharp, Stefano Stabellini, H. Peter Anvin, Chris Ball, Darren Hart, Linus Torvalds, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, ksummit-2013-discuss, Willy Tarreau On Fri, 2013-07-19 at 13:42 -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: > But you are avoiding the question as well; do you think there's > something fundamentally different about the female brain that makes > them more susceptible to personal attacks? If yes, where is the > scientific evidence? If there's no evidence, then it's merely an > opinion that is not shared by others (e.g. me), and if no, then > whatever the men can take, the women can take as well, so nothing > needs to change. I don't know bout susceptible to personal attacks, but I have two teenage daughters and I can't figure them out yet. I'll say something that I think might get them upset and they are fine with it. Then I'll say something, where I see no harm, and suddenly I'm the most evil person in the world and they go all emotional on me. Women are too complex for me to figure out. Perhaps men are just too simple minded (my wife keeps telling me that). Or perhaps it's just me ;-) -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-19 18:56 ` Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-19 20:33 ` James Bottomley 2013-07-19 20:43 ` Steven Rostedt 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: James Bottomley @ 2013-07-19 20:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Felipe Contreras, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Willy Tarreau, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Fri, 2013-07-19 at 14:56 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Fri, 2013-07-19 at 13:42 -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: > > > But you are avoiding the question as well; do you think there's > > something fundamentally different about the female brain that makes > > them more susceptible to personal attacks? If yes, where is the > > scientific evidence? If there's no evidence, then it's merely an > > opinion that is not shared by others (e.g. me), and if no, then > > whatever the men can take, the women can take as well, so nothing > > needs to change. > > I don't know bout susceptible to personal attacks, but I have two > teenage daughters and I can't figure them out yet. I'll say something > that I think might get them upset and they are fine with it. Then I'll > say something, where I see no harm, and suddenly I'm the most evil > person in the world and they go all emotional on me. I'm afraid I've got bad news for you: That's not a male/female thing, that's a teenage thing. I'm also afraid that it's set to continue for a while yet. > Women are too complex for me to figure out. Perhaps men are just too > simple minded (my wife keeps telling me that). Or perhaps it's just > me ;-) If you're basing your entire theory on male/female interaction on teenagers, then I'm afraid your wife might be on to something ... James ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-19 20:33 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] " James Bottomley @ 2013-07-19 20:43 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-19 23:46 ` NeilBrown 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-19 20:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: James Bottomley Cc: Felipe Contreras, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Willy Tarreau, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Fri, 2013-07-19 at 13:33 -0700, James Bottomley wrote: > If you're basing your entire theory on male/female interaction on > teenagers, then I'm afraid your wife might be on to something ... No, it's also based on interaction with my Wife and her sister too ;-) -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-19 20:43 ` Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-19 23:46 ` NeilBrown 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: NeilBrown @ 2013-07-19 23:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: James Bottomley, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Felipe Contreras, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Ingo Molnar, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Willy Tarreau [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3407 bytes --] On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 16:43:53 -0400 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > On Fri, 2013-07-19 at 13:33 -0700, James Bottomley wrote: > > > If you're basing your entire theory on male/female interaction on > > teenagers, then I'm afraid your wife might be on to something ... > > No, it's also based on interaction with my Wife and her sister too ;-) > I genuinely think the gender difference is a distraction. The simple fact is that people are different. Wildly amazingly beautifully different. Certainly some metrics have starkly different averages for men than women, and there can be biological and social drivers of that. But those metrics very often vary greatly among men and among women. But it's really people that are different. Some people are very perceptive of, and responsive to, those differences. They are able and willing to listen and understand and adjust. They try to fit in with others. I know a few people like that and I am staggered by how effectively they bond with other people. Other people are blind to the differences. They expect everyone to be just like themselves. When the reality shows that isn't true they create coarse stereotypes to allow them to pigeon hole others. This naturally leads to prejudice and sometimes to hate. And I know a few people like that too - maybe not quite the extreme, but certainly closer to that extreme than me. I believe that the abstract/mathematical/literal abilities that allow someone to be good at software development is inversely correlated with the holistic/forgiving/flexible abilities that allow someone to be good at understanding others. One needs to care deeply about small details. The other needs to work with hints and suggestions and accept that precision is simply not available. I know for myself that such understanding of people as I have has developed slowly due to hard work, patience from a loving wife and others, and from me stepping well outside my comfort zone - where as the mathematical ability was obvious in kindergarten and never needed any encouragement. And the people I know who are very good with other people are about as comfortable with technology as I am with strangers (i.e. not very). If this negative correlation is true, then it says something very important about our community. I don't think there is any need for me to spell it out. I think the recent discussion demonstrates this quite clearly. Lots of beating on chests, very little meeting of minds. Lots of talk about technical solutions (or non-solutions), very little suggestion of acknowledgement, accommodation or compromise. [some - yes. But not much] Maybe that is just who we are. Yes, we are sometimes blind to differences in others and can lead us to hurt and repel them. But that blindness allows us to focus on excellence in technology and so it is worth it. Or maybe that is only who were were. Maybe we've got the technology pretty much under control and we (individuals) can choose to put more effort into listening to people who are very different to us. Stop accepting the fact that we "just don't understand some people" and use our not inconsiderable intellect find some understanding. (and no, I don't completely understand my wife either, but I'm sure I understand her better now than I once did). NeilBrown [-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-19 18:42 ` Felipe Contreras 2013-07-19 18:56 ` Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-19 20:03 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2013-07-20 12:35 ` Felipe Contreras 2013-07-20 17:04 ` Ben Hutchings 2 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Geert Uytterhoeven @ 2013-07-19 20:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Felipe Contreras Cc: Ingo Molnar, Sarah Sharp, Stefano Stabellini, H. Peter Anvin, Steven Rostedt, Chris Ball, Darren Hart, Linus Torvalds, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, ksummit-2013-discuss, Willy Tarreau On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 8:42 PM, Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote: >> >> * Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> As Linus already pointed out, not everybody has to work with everybody. >> >> That's not the point though, the point is to potentially roughly double >> the creative brain capacity of the Linux kernel project. > > Unfortunately that's impossible; we all know there aren't as many > women programmers as there are men. So there's absolutely *nothing* > the Linux kernel can do to double the creative brain capacity of the > Linux kernel project (at least with respect to women). There may be less women programmers than men programmers, but that doesn't say anything about the ratio of female Linux kernel hackers vs. female programmers. So let's hope we can prove you wrong soon ;-) Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-19 20:03 ` Geert Uytterhoeven @ 2013-07-20 12:35 ` Felipe Contreras 2013-07-21 1:02 ` Daniel Phillips 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Felipe Contreras @ 2013-07-20 12:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Geert Uytterhoeven Cc: Ingo Molnar, Sarah Sharp, Stefano Stabellini, H. Peter Anvin, Steven Rostedt, Chris Ball, Darren Hart, Linus Torvalds, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, ksummit-2013-discuss, Willy Tarreau On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 3:03 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 8:42 PM, Felipe Contreras > <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote: >>> >>> * Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>> As Linus already pointed out, not everybody has to work with everybody. >>> >>> That's not the point though, the point is to potentially roughly double >>> the creative brain capacity of the Linux kernel project. >> >> Unfortunately that's impossible; we all know there aren't as many >> women programmers as there are men. So there's absolutely *nothing* >> the Linux kernel can do to double the creative brain capacity of the >> Linux kernel project (at least with respect to women). > > There may be less women programmers than men programmers, but that > doesn't say anything about the ratio of female Linux kernel hackers vs. > female programmers. I think it does, because Linux kernel programmers is a subset of programmers; the very best and very low-level. Unless women programmers are disproportionately biased towards low-level, and they are significantly better than their male counterparts, I wouldn't be holding my breath. The best case scenario is that we are equal in that regard, in which case you probably would expect to double or triple the number of female programmers in Linux thanks to outreach programs, but certainly not match the amount of male ones. > So let's hope we can prove you wrong soon ;-) I think you need more than "hope" to change one of the fundamental rules of LKML; be open and honest, even if that means expressing your opinion in a way that others might consider offensive and colorful. -- Felipe Contreras ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-20 12:35 ` Felipe Contreras @ 2013-07-21 1:02 ` Daniel Phillips 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Daniel Phillips @ 2013-07-21 1:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Felipe Contreras Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, stable, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On 07/20/2013 12:36 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote: > I think you need more than "hope" to change one of the fundamental > rules of LKML; be open and honest, even if that means expressing your > opinion in a way that others might consider offensive and colorful. Logical fallacy type: bifurcation. You can be open and honest without being offensive or abusive. Regards, Daniel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML @ 2013-07-21 1:02 ` Daniel Phillips 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Daniel Phillips @ 2013-07-21 1:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Felipe Contreras Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, stable, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On 07/20/2013 12:36 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote: > I think you need more than "hope" to change one of the fundamental > rules of LKML; be open and honest, even if that means expressing your > opinion in a way that others might consider offensive and colorful. Logical fallacy type: bifurcation. You can be open and honest without being offensive or abusive. Regards, Daniel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-21 1:02 ` Daniel Phillips @ 2013-07-24 0:51 ` Felipe Contreras -1 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Felipe Contreras @ 2013-07-24 0:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Phillips Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, stable, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Daniel Phillips <d.phillips@partner.samsung.com> wrote: > On 07/20/2013 12:36 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote: >> I think you need more than "hope" to change one of the fundamental >> rules of LKML; be open and honest, even if that means expressing your >> opinion in a way that others might consider offensive and colorful. > > Logical fallacy type: bifurcation. You can be open and honest without > being offensive or abusive. You are mistaken, that is not what the false dichotomy fallacy means. I'm not saying you have to be A (open and honest), or B (polite), and that you can't be both, if that's what you arguing (which seems to be the case), you are wrong, and to argue against that position would be a straw man fallacy. Your mistaken fallacy seems to be that you think one can *always* be both A (open and honest), and B (polite), I'm not sure if there's a name for that fallacy, but you don't provide any evidence for that claim. And even supposing that such an obvious fallacy (that one can *always* be both open and honest, and polite) was true, the fact that something *can* be done, doesn't mean it *should* be done. -- Felipe Contreras ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML @ 2013-07-24 0:51 ` Felipe Contreras 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Felipe Contreras @ 2013-07-24 0:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Phillips Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, stable, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Daniel Phillips <d.phillips@partner.samsung.com> wrote: > On 07/20/2013 12:36 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote: >> I think you need more than "hope" to change one of the fundamental >> rules of LKML; be open and honest, even if that means expressing your >> opinion in a way that others might consider offensive and colorful. > > Logical fallacy type: bifurcation. You can be open and honest without > being offensive or abusive. You are mistaken, that is not what the false dichotomy fallacy means. I'm not saying you have to be A (open and honest), or B (polite), and that you can't be both, if that's what you arguing (which seems to be the case), you are wrong, and to argue against that position would be a straw man fallacy. Your mistaken fallacy seems to be that you think one can *always* be both A (open and honest), and B (polite), I'm not sure if there's a name for that fallacy, but you don't provide any evidence for that claim. And even supposing that such an obvious fallacy (that one can *always* be both open and honest, and polite) was true, the fact that something *can* be done, doesn't mean it *should* be done. -- Felipe Contreras ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-24 0:51 ` Felipe Contreras @ 2013-07-24 1:26 ` James Bottomley -1 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: James Bottomley @ 2013-07-24 1:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Felipe Contreras Cc: Daniel Phillips, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Ingo Molnar, Geert Uytterhoeven, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Willy Tarreau On Tue, 2013-07-23 at 19:51 -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: > On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Daniel Phillips > <d.phillips@partner.samsung.com> wrote: > > On 07/20/2013 12:36 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote: > >> I think you need more than "hope" to change one of the fundamental > >> rules of LKML; be open and honest, even if that means expressing your > >> opinion in a way that others might consider offensive and colorful. > > > > Logical fallacy type: bifurcation. You can be open and honest without > > being offensive or abusive. > > You are mistaken, that is not what the false dichotomy fallacy means. > I'm not saying you have to be A (open and honest), or B (polite), and > that you can't be both, if that's what you arguing (which seems to be > the case), you are wrong, and to argue against that position would be > a straw man fallacy. > > Your mistaken fallacy seems to be that you think one can *always* be > both A (open and honest), and B (polite), I'm not sure if there's a > name for that fallacy, but you don't provide any evidence for that > claim. It's not actually one of the original logical fallacies, but it's called argument to moderation or false compromise: The fallacy is the assumption that the original statements represent extremal positions of a continuum so there must always be middle ground which represents the correct statement. To those accepting the fallacy making the middle ground statement by that fact alone demonstrates the invalidity of the previous proposition. I think it's not in the original fallacies because they come from Greek rhetoric and the Greeks believed dialectic: the taking opposite positions and arguing them thoroughly. It's only with the advent of Western European political systems that we're conditioned to seek compromise without rigorous examination. This actually makes argument to moderation one of the most effective rhetorical tools in use today for discrediting an opponent's argument without actually addressing it. James ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML @ 2013-07-24 1:26 ` James Bottomley 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: James Bottomley @ 2013-07-24 1:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Felipe Contreras Cc: Daniel Phillips, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Ingo Molnar, Geert Uytterhoeven, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Willy Tarreau On Tue, 2013-07-23 at 19:51 -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: > On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Daniel Phillips > <d.phillips@partner.samsung.com> wrote: > > On 07/20/2013 12:36 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote: > >> I think you need more than "hope" to change one of the fundamental > >> rules of LKML; be open and honest, even if that means expressing your > >> opinion in a way that others might consider offensive and colorful. > > > > Logical fallacy type: bifurcation. You can be open and honest without > > being offensive or abusive. > > You are mistaken, that is not what the false dichotomy fallacy means. > I'm not saying you have to be A (open and honest), or B (polite), and > that you can't be both, if that's what you arguing (which seems to be > the case), you are wrong, and to argue against that position would be > a straw man fallacy. > > Your mistaken fallacy seems to be that you think one can *always* be > both A (open and honest), and B (polite), I'm not sure if there's a > name for that fallacy, but you don't provide any evidence for that > claim. It's not actually one of the original logical fallacies, but it's called argument to moderation or false compromise: The fallacy is the assumption that the original statements represent extremal positions of a continuum so there must always be middle ground which represents the correct statement. To those accepting the fallacy making the middle ground statement by that fact alone demonstrates the invalidity of the previous proposition. I think it's not in the original fallacies because they come from Greek rhetoric and the Greeks believed dialectic: the taking opposite positions and arguing them thoroughly. It's only with the advent of Western European political systems that we're conditioned to seek compromise without rigorous examination. This actually makes argument to moderation one of the most effective rhetorical tools in use today for discrediting an opponent's argument without actually addressing it. James ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-24 1:26 ` James Bottomley @ 2013-07-24 1:38 ` Steven Rostedt -1 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-24 1:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: James Bottomley Cc: Felipe Contreras, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Willy Tarreau, Geert Uytterhoeven, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Tue, 2013-07-23 at 18:26 -0700, James Bottomley wrote: > I think it's not in the original fallacies because they come from Greek > rhetoric and the Greeks believed dialectic: the taking opposite > positions and arguing them thoroughly. It's only with the advent of > Western European political systems that we're conditioned to seek > compromise without rigorous examination. This actually makes argument > to moderation one of the most effective rhetorical tools in use today > for discrediting an opponent's argument without actually addressing it. What? Really? You mean the truth doesn't lie in the middle between evolution and creationism? -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML @ 2013-07-24 1:38 ` Steven Rostedt 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-24 1:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: James Bottomley Cc: Felipe Contreras, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Willy Tarreau, Geert Uytterhoeven, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Tue, 2013-07-23 at 18:26 -0700, James Bottomley wrote: > I think it's not in the original fallacies because they come from Greek > rhetoric and the Greeks believed dialectic: the taking opposite > positions and arguing them thoroughly. It's only with the advent of > Western European political systems that we're conditioned to seek > compromise without rigorous examination. This actually makes argument > to moderation one of the most effective rhetorical tools in use today > for discrediting an opponent's argument without actually addressing it. What? Really? You mean the truth doesn't lie in the middle between evolution and creationism? -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-24 1:38 ` Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-24 16:23 ` James Bottomley -1 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: James Bottomley @ 2013-07-24 16:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Felipe Contreras, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Ingo Molnar, Geert Uytterhoeven, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Willy Tarreau On Tue, 2013-07-23 at 21:38 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 2013-07-23 at 18:26 -0700, James Bottomley wrote: > > > I think it's not in the original fallacies because they come from Greek > > rhetoric and the Greeks believed dialectic: the taking opposite > > positions and arguing them thoroughly. It's only with the advent of > > Western European political systems that we're conditioned to seek > > compromise without rigorous examination. This actually makes argument > > to moderation one of the most effective rhetorical tools in use today > > for discrediting an opponent's argument without actually addressing it. > > What? Really? You mean the truth doesn't lie in the middle between > evolution and creationism? Well, you jest, but actually Intelligent Design is usually presented as a false compromise between the "extremes" of evolution and creationism. If you listen to it's proponents, the rhetorical device they use to argue for legitimacy is precisely an argument to moderation. James ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML @ 2013-07-24 16:23 ` James Bottomley 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: James Bottomley @ 2013-07-24 16:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Felipe Contreras, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Ingo Molnar, Geert Uytterhoeven, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Willy Tarreau On Tue, 2013-07-23 at 21:38 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 2013-07-23 at 18:26 -0700, James Bottomley wrote: > > > I think it's not in the original fallacies because they come from Greek > > rhetoric and the Greeks believed dialectic: the taking opposite > > positions and arguing them thoroughly. It's only with the advent of > > Western European political systems that we're conditioned to seek > > compromise without rigorous examination. This actually makes argument > > to moderation one of the most effective rhetorical tools in use today > > for discrediting an opponent's argument without actually addressing it. > > What? Really? You mean the truth doesn't lie in the middle between > evolution and creationism? Well, you jest, but actually Intelligent Design is usually presented as a false compromise between the "extremes" of evolution and creationism. If you listen to it's proponents, the rhetorical device they use to argue for legitimacy is precisely an argument to moderation. James ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-24 16:23 ` James Bottomley @ 2013-07-24 16:50 ` Steven Rostedt -1 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-24 16:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: James Bottomley Cc: ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Felipe Contreras, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Ingo Molnar, Geert Uytterhoeven, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Willy Tarreau On Wed, 2013-07-24 at 09:23 -0700, James Bottomley wrote: > On Tue, 2013-07-23 at 21:38 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Tue, 2013-07-23 at 18:26 -0700, James Bottomley wrote: > > > > > I think it's not in the original fallacies because they come from Greek > > > rhetoric and the Greeks believed dialectic: the taking opposite > > > positions and arguing them thoroughly. It's only with the advent of > > > Western European political systems that we're conditioned to seek > > > compromise without rigorous examination. This actually makes argument > > > to moderation one of the most effective rhetorical tools in use today > > > for discrediting an opponent's argument without actually addressing it. > > > > What? Really? You mean the truth doesn't lie in the middle between > > evolution and creationism? > > Well, you jest, but actually Intelligent Design is usually presented as > a false compromise between the "extremes" of evolution and creationism. > If you listen to it's proponents, the rhetorical device they use to > argue for legitimacy is precisely an argument to moderation. Exactly, which is why I used that as an example. And also, just to kick the hornet's nest. -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML @ 2013-07-24 16:50 ` Steven Rostedt 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-24 16:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: James Bottomley Cc: ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Felipe Contreras, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Ingo Molnar, Geert Uytterhoeven, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Willy Tarreau On Wed, 2013-07-24 at 09:23 -0700, James Bottomley wrote: > On Tue, 2013-07-23 at 21:38 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Tue, 2013-07-23 at 18:26 -0700, James Bottomley wrote: > > > > > I think it's not in the original fallacies because they come from Greek > > > rhetoric and the Greeks believed dialectic: the taking opposite > > > positions and arguing them thoroughly. It's only with the advent of > > > Western European political systems that we're conditioned to seek > > > compromise without rigorous examination. This actually makes argument > > > to moderation one of the most effective rhetorical tools in use today > > > for discrediting an opponent's argument without actually addressing it. > > > > What? Really? You mean the truth doesn't lie in the middle between > > evolution and creationism? > > Well, you jest, but actually Intelligent Design is usually presented as > a false compromise between the "extremes" of evolution and creationism. > If you listen to it's proponents, the rhetorical device they use to > argue for legitimacy is precisely an argument to moderation. Exactly, which is why I used that as an example. And also, just to kick the hornet's nest. -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-24 1:26 ` James Bottomley @ 2013-07-24 1:48 ` Paul Gortmaker -1 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Paul Gortmaker @ 2013-07-24 1:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: James Bottomley Cc: Felipe Contreras, Daniel Phillips, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Ingo Molnar, Geert Uytterhoeven, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Willy Tarreau On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:26 PM, James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com> wrote: > On Tue, 2013-07-23 at 19:51 -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: >> On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Daniel Phillips >> <d.phillips@partner.samsung.com> wrote: >> > On 07/20/2013 12:36 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote: >> >> I think you need more than "hope" to change one of the fundamental >> >> rules of LKML; be open and honest, even if that means expressing your >> >> opinion in a way that others might consider offensive and colorful. >> > >> > Logical fallacy type: bifurcation. You can be open and honest without >> > being offensive or abusive. >> >> You are mistaken, that is not what the false dichotomy fallacy means. >> I'm not saying you have to be A (open and honest), or B (polite), and >> that you can't be both, if that's what you arguing (which seems to be >> the case), you are wrong, and to argue against that position would be >> a straw man fallacy. >> >> Your mistaken fallacy seems to be that you think one can *always* be >> both A (open and honest), and B (polite), I'm not sure if there's a >> name for that fallacy, but you don't provide any evidence for that >> claim. > > It's not actually one of the original logical fallacies, but it's called > argument to moderation or false compromise: The fallacy is the > assumption that the original statements represent extremal positions of > a continuum so there must always be middle ground which represents the > correct statement. To those accepting the fallacy making the middle > ground statement by that fact alone demonstrates the invalidity of the > previous proposition. And when so many of us had convinced ourselves that this thread could not possibly descend any further into the off-topic weeds... Good job. That assumption has now been shattered by bringing in ancient Greece. Given that, I'd like to propose a KS topic that covers Adam Smith, and John Stuart Mill, Leviathan by Hobbes, and The Politics by Aristotle. C'mon folks. This is beyond silly. Let us look at the things that we can really change, or at least influence change within. Things that really matter to linux today and tomorrow. P. --- > > I think it's not in the original fallacies because they come from Greek > rhetoric and the Greeks believed dialectic: the taking opposite > positions and arguing them thoroughly. It's only with the advent of > Western European political systems that we're conditioned to seek > compromise without rigorous examination. This actually makes argument > to moderation one of the most effective rhetorical tools in use today > for discrediting an opponent's argument without actually addressing it. > > James > > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML @ 2013-07-24 1:48 ` Paul Gortmaker 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Paul Gortmaker @ 2013-07-24 1:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: James Bottomley Cc: Felipe Contreras, Daniel Phillips, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Ingo Molnar, Geert Uytterhoeven, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Willy Tarreau On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:26 PM, James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com> wrote: > On Tue, 2013-07-23 at 19:51 -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: >> On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Daniel Phillips >> <d.phillips@partner.samsung.com> wrote: >> > On 07/20/2013 12:36 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote: >> >> I think you need more than "hope" to change one of the fundamental >> >> rules of LKML; be open and honest, even if that means expressing your >> >> opinion in a way that others might consider offensive and colorful. >> > >> > Logical fallacy type: bifurcation. You can be open and honest without >> > being offensive or abusive. >> >> You are mistaken, that is not what the false dichotomy fallacy means. >> I'm not saying you have to be A (open and honest), or B (polite), and >> that you can't be both, if that's what you arguing (which seems to be >> the case), you are wrong, and to argue against that position would be >> a straw man fallacy. >> >> Your mistaken fallacy seems to be that you think one can *always* be >> both A (open and honest), and B (polite), I'm not sure if there's a >> name for that fallacy, but you don't provide any evidence for that >> claim. > > It's not actually one of the original logical fallacies, but it's called > argument to moderation or false compromise: The fallacy is the > assumption that the original statements represent extremal positions of > a continuum so there must always be middle ground which represents the > correct statement. To those accepting the fallacy making the middle > ground statement by that fact alone demonstrates the invalidity of the > previous proposition. And when so many of us had convinced ourselves that this thread could not possibly descend any further into the off-topic weeds... Good job. That assumption has now been shattered by bringing in ancient Greece. Given that, I'd like to propose a KS topic that covers Adam Smith, and John Stuart Mill, Leviathan by Hobbes, and The Politics by Aristotle. C'mon folks. This is beyond silly. Let us look at the things that we can really change, or at least influence change within. Things that really matter to linux today and tomorrow. P. --- > > I think it's not in the original fallacies because they come from Greek > rhetoric and the Greeks believed dialectic: the taking opposite > positions and arguing them thoroughly. It's only with the advent of > Western European political systems that we're conditioned to seek > compromise without rigorous examination. This actually makes argument > to moderation one of the most effective rhetorical tools in use today > for discrediting an opponent's argument without actually addressing it. > > James > > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-24 1:48 ` Paul Gortmaker @ 2013-07-24 1:53 ` Steven Rostedt -1 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-24 1:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paul Gortmaker Cc: James Bottomley, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Felipe Contreras, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Willy Tarreau, Geert Uytterhoeven, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Tue, 2013-07-23 at 21:48 -0400, Paul Gortmaker wrote: > C'mon folks. This is beyond silly. Let us look at the things that we > can really change, or at least influence change within. Things that > really matter to linux today and tomorrow. Ah, so there is middle ground between creationism and evolution! -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML @ 2013-07-24 1:53 ` Steven Rostedt 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-24 1:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paul Gortmaker Cc: James Bottomley, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Felipe Contreras, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Willy Tarreau, Geert Uytterhoeven, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Tue, 2013-07-23 at 21:48 -0400, Paul Gortmaker wrote: > C'mon folks. This is beyond silly. Let us look at the things that we > can really change, or at least influence change within. Things that > really matter to linux today and tomorrow. Ah, so there is middle ground between creationism and evolution! -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-24 0:51 ` Felipe Contreras @ 2013-07-24 8:57 ` Daniel Phillips -1 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Daniel Phillips @ 2013-07-24 8:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Felipe Contreras Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, stable, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On 07/24/2013 12:51 AM, Felipe Contreras wrote: > Your mistaken fallacy seems to be that you think one can *always* be > both A (open and honest), and B (polite)... You are are right, I do think that you can *always* be both open and honest, and polite. I do not believe that I am mistaken. And I hope that you will come to agree with me in the not too distant future. Regards, Daniel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML @ 2013-07-24 8:57 ` Daniel Phillips 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Daniel Phillips @ 2013-07-24 8:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Felipe Contreras Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, stable, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On 07/24/2013 12:51 AM, Felipe Contreras wrote: > Your mistaken fallacy seems to be that you think one can *always* be > both A (open and honest), and B (polite)... You are are right, I do think that you can *always* be both open and honest, and polite. I do not believe that I am mistaken. And I hope that you will come to agree with me in the not too distant future. Regards, Daniel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-24 8:57 ` Daniel Phillips @ 2013-07-25 14:00 ` Felipe Contreras -1 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Felipe Contreras @ 2013-07-25 14:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Phillips Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, stable, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 3:57 AM, Daniel Phillips <d.phillips@partner.samsung.com> wrote: > On 07/24/2013 12:51 AM, Felipe Contreras wrote: >> Your mistaken fallacy seems to be that you think one can *always* be >> both A (open and honest), and B (polite)... > > You are are right, I do think that you can *always* be both open and > honest, and polite. I do not believe that I am mistaken. And I hope that > you will come to agree with me in the not too distant future. What I come to agree is irrelevant. What you _hope_ is not important. What you _believe_ doesn't really matter. You've stated what you *think*, that barely has any value in the discussion, but all right, you've done so already... duly noted. Moving on. What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. -- Felipe Contreras ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML @ 2013-07-25 14:00 ` Felipe Contreras 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Felipe Contreras @ 2013-07-25 14:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Phillips Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, stable, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 3:57 AM, Daniel Phillips <d.phillips@partner.samsung.com> wrote: > On 07/24/2013 12:51 AM, Felipe Contreras wrote: >> Your mistaken fallacy seems to be that you think one can *always* be >> both A (open and honest), and B (polite)... > > You are are right, I do think that you can *always* be both open and > honest, and polite. I do not believe that I am mistaken. And I hope that > you will come to agree with me in the not too distant future. What I come to agree is irrelevant. What you _hope_ is not important. What you _believe_ doesn't really matter. You've stated what you *think*, that barely has any value in the discussion, but all right, you've done so already... duly noted. Moving on. What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. -- Felipe Contreras ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-25 14:00 ` Felipe Contreras @ 2013-07-25 14:33 ` Willy Tarreau -1 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Willy Tarreau @ 2013-07-25 14:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Felipe Contreras Cc: Daniel Phillips, Geert Uytterhoeven, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 09:00:37AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: > Moving on. What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed > without evidence. Guys, could we please stop this endless boring thread ? Thank you. Willy ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML @ 2013-07-25 14:33 ` Willy Tarreau 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Willy Tarreau @ 2013-07-25 14:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Felipe Contreras Cc: Daniel Phillips, Geert Uytterhoeven, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 09:00:37AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: > Moving on. What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed > without evidence. Guys, could we please stop this endless boring thread ? Thank you. Willy ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-25 14:33 ` Willy Tarreau @ 2013-07-25 14:49 ` Steven Rostedt -1 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-25 14:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Willy Tarreau Cc: Felipe Contreras, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Geert Uytterhoeven, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Thu, 2013-07-25 at 16:33 +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > Guys, could we please stop this endless boring thread ? Just do what I did and kill it with a /dev/null filter. But wait! How did I see this email? Oh shit! It's come back from the dead!!!! -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML @ 2013-07-25 14:49 ` Steven Rostedt 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-25 14:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Willy Tarreau Cc: Felipe Contreras, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Geert Uytterhoeven, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Thu, 2013-07-25 at 16:33 +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > Guys, could we please stop this endless boring thread ? Just do what I did and kill it with a /dev/null filter. But wait! How did I see this email? Oh shit! It's come back from the dead!!!! -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-25 14:33 ` Willy Tarreau @ 2013-07-25 22:51 ` Daniel Phillips -1 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Daniel Phillips @ 2013-07-25 22:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Willy Tarreau Cc: Felipe Contreras, Geert Uytterhoeven, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On 07/25/2013 02:34 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote: > Guys, could we please stop this endless boring thread ? Willy, I believe we are on the same side of the civility debate, but I somehow got the feeling that you just characterized my comment re "open and honest" as "endless and boring". I agree that the attempt to divert the intent of my comment into a farcical debate on debating was not worth the internet bytes it was printed on. In fact, that nicely demonstrates one class of technique commonly used on lkml to silence criticism, and is worth studying from that viewpoint. That sort of diverting should end, particularly in regards to the topic at hand. Regards, Daniel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML @ 2013-07-25 22:51 ` Daniel Phillips 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Daniel Phillips @ 2013-07-25 22:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Willy Tarreau Cc: Felipe Contreras, Geert Uytterhoeven, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On 07/25/2013 02:34 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote: > Guys, could we please stop this endless boring thread ? Willy, I believe we are on the same side of the civility debate, but I somehow got the feeling that you just characterized my comment re "open and honest" as "endless and boring". I agree that the attempt to divert the intent of my comment into a farcical debate on debating was not worth the internet bytes it was printed on. In fact, that nicely demonstrates one class of technique commonly used on lkml to silence criticism, and is worth studying from that viewpoint. That sort of diverting should end, particularly in regards to the topic at hand. Regards, Daniel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-25 22:51 ` Daniel Phillips @ 2013-07-25 23:30 ` Willy Tarreau -1 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Willy Tarreau @ 2013-07-25 23:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Phillips Cc: Felipe Contreras, Geert Uytterhoeven, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 10:51:21PM +0000, Daniel Phillips wrote: > On 07/25/2013 02:34 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > Guys, could we please stop this endless boring thread ? > > Willy, I believe we are on the same side of the civility debate, but I > somehow got the feeling that you just characterized my comment re "open > and honest" as "endless and boring". > > I agree that the attempt to divert the intent of my comment into a > farcical debate on debating was not worth the internet bytes it was > printed on. In fact, that nicely demonstrates one class of technique > commonly used on lkml to silence criticism, and is worth studying from > that viewpoint. That sort of diverting should end, particularly in > regards to the topic at hand. Daniel, the thread has long diverted and has become a philosophical debate. I'm still in CC since almost the beginning because I dared to respond to the *original* discussion (on the subject of how to better tag commits for stable), conscious of the risk I was taking. I've long stopped reading this and am still getting these e-mails which remind me some old tv shows I could occasionally discover when I was a kid, with old daddies with long hair discussing whether writing with a hand in the pocket is better for health than brushing your hair with a plastic brush or not... So I have no problem stating it here : no, this thread doesn't interest me anymore. Only the few first exchanges did (those on the workflow of commits). I could humbly ask to be removed from the CC list, but since -stable is CCed as well I'll still receive these discussions in my mailbox. And given that I'm not the only one to find this one boring, I believe it is not a selfish request from me to kindly ask this thing to stop. After all, 2 or 3 persons sending off-topic e-mails to 10, 20, or even 50k subscribers on a development list might look inadequate to some readers. Thus, I think it would be *polite* from people who entertain this thread while smoking I-don't-know-what, to agree that there will always be some areas where they disagree, that they shake their respective hands and silently quit the scene so that we can turn off the lights and all go to bed. Thanks for your understanding, Willy ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML @ 2013-07-25 23:30 ` Willy Tarreau 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Willy Tarreau @ 2013-07-25 23:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Phillips Cc: Felipe Contreras, Geert Uytterhoeven, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 10:51:21PM +0000, Daniel Phillips wrote: > On 07/25/2013 02:34 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > Guys, could we please stop this endless boring thread ? > > Willy, I believe we are on the same side of the civility debate, but I > somehow got the feeling that you just characterized my comment re "open > and honest" as "endless and boring". > > I agree that the attempt to divert the intent of my comment into a > farcical debate on debating was not worth the internet bytes it was > printed on. In fact, that nicely demonstrates one class of technique > commonly used on lkml to silence criticism, and is worth studying from > that viewpoint. That sort of diverting should end, particularly in > regards to the topic at hand. Daniel, the thread has long diverted and has become a philosophical debate. I'm still in CC since almost the beginning because I dared to respond to the *original* discussion (on the subject of how to better tag commits for stable), conscious of the risk I was taking. I've long stopped reading this and am still getting these e-mails which remind me some old tv shows I could occasionally discover when I was a kid, with old daddies with long hair discussing whether writing with a hand in the pocket is better for health than brushing your hair with a plastic brush or not... So I have no problem stating it here : no, this thread doesn't interest me anymore. Only the few first exchanges did (those on the workflow of commits). I could humbly ask to be removed from the CC list, but since -stable is CCed as well I'll still receive these discussions in my mailbox. And given that I'm not the only one to find this one boring, I believe it is not a selfish request from me to kindly ask this thing to stop. After all, 2 or 3 persons sending off-topic e-mails to 10, 20, or even 50k subscribers on a development list might look inadequate to some readers. Thus, I think it would be *polite* from people who entertain this thread while smoking I-don't-know-what, to agree that there will always be some areas where they disagree, that they shake their respective hands and silently quit the scene so that we can turn off the lights and all go to bed. Thanks for your understanding, Willy ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-25 23:30 ` Willy Tarreau @ 2013-07-25 23:44 ` Daniel Phillips -1 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Daniel Phillips @ 2013-07-25 23:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Willy Tarreau Cc: Felipe Contreras, Geert Uytterhoeven, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar Hi Willy, I understand completely. I don't blame you. Filter the thread. Done. I am not tired of the subject, quite the contrary. Please do not speak for me in that regard. After many years of wandering in the toxic wasteland, finally some actual progress. Regards, Daniel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML @ 2013-07-25 23:44 ` Daniel Phillips 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Daniel Phillips @ 2013-07-25 23:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Willy Tarreau Cc: Felipe Contreras, Geert Uytterhoeven, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar Hi Willy, I understand completely. I don't blame you. Filter the thread. Done. I am not tired of the subject, quite the contrary. Please do not speak for me in that regard. After many years of wandering in the toxic wasteland, finally some actual progress. Regards, Daniel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-25 23:44 ` Daniel Phillips @ 2013-07-26 5:22 ` Willy Tarreau -1 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Willy Tarreau @ 2013-07-26 5:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Phillips Cc: Felipe Contreras, Geert Uytterhoeven, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 11:44:50PM +0000, Daniel Phillips wrote: > Hi Willy, > > I understand completely. I don't blame you. Filter the thread. Done. So because people speak loudly at night below my window in summer, I have to close the window and install a fan to get some air ? And all the neighbours have to do the same ? Sorry, there are places for this I'd rather politely ask them to go to these places. And anyway it's much easier for me to write rules to block addresses than subjects, so if I am bored enough to write a rule it will target the participants. Keep your discussion on LKML if you want it to be public, it's even on the subject and nobody will care because nobody has it in his main mailbox anymore. But please remove the other people that were left CCed and who don't participate to the thread, as well as the ksummit and stable lists that are for completely different purposes. Thanks, Willy ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML @ 2013-07-26 5:22 ` Willy Tarreau 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Willy Tarreau @ 2013-07-26 5:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Phillips Cc: Felipe Contreras, Geert Uytterhoeven, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 11:44:50PM +0000, Daniel Phillips wrote: > Hi Willy, > > I understand completely. I don't blame you. Filter the thread. Done. So because people speak loudly at night below my window in summer, I have to close the window and install a fan to get some air ? And all the neighbours have to do the same ? Sorry, there are places for this I'd rather politely ask them to go to these places. And anyway it's much easier for me to write rules to block addresses than subjects, so if I am bored enough to write a rule it will target the participants. Keep your discussion on LKML if you want it to be public, it's even on the subject and nobody will care because nobody has it in his main mailbox anymore. But please remove the other people that were left CCed and who don't participate to the thread, as well as the ksummit and stable lists that are for completely different purposes. Thanks, Willy ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-19 18:42 ` Felipe Contreras 2013-07-19 18:56 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-19 20:03 ` Geert Uytterhoeven @ 2013-07-20 17:04 ` Ben Hutchings 2013-07-21 13:22 ` Ric Wheeler 2 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Ben Hutchings @ 2013-07-20 17:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Felipe Contreras Cc: Ingo Molnar, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Willy Tarreau [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1262 bytes --] On Fri, 2013-07-19 at 13:42 -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: > On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > * Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> As Linus already pointed out, not everybody has to work with everybody. > > > > That's not the point though, the point is to potentially roughly double > > the creative brain capacity of the Linux kernel project. > > Unfortunately that's impossible; we all know there aren't as many > women programmers as there are men. In some countries, though not all. But we also know (or should realise) that the gender ratio among programmers in general is much less unbalanced than in some free software communities including the Linux kernel developers. > So there's absolutely *nothing* > the Linux kernel can do to double the creative brain capacity of the > Linux kernel project (at least with respect to women). > > At best that is a societal/academic/professional issue, not a Linux issue. [...] There is a broader societal issue, but that doesn't mean that there isn't also a problem at the level of individual developer communities. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Humans are not rational beings; they are rationalising beings. [-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-20 17:04 ` Ben Hutchings @ 2013-07-21 13:22 ` Ric Wheeler 2013-07-23 1:26 ` Li Zefan 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Ric Wheeler @ 2013-07-21 13:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ben Hutchings Cc: Felipe Contreras, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Willy Tarreau, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On 07/20/2013 01:04 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote: > n Fri, 2013-07-19 at 13:42 -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: >> >On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Ingo Molnar<mingo@kernel.org> wrote: >>> > > >>> > >* Felipe Contreras<felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >>>> > >>As Linus already pointed out, not everybody has to work with everybody. >>> > > >>> > >That's not the point though, the point is to potentially roughly double >>> > >the creative brain capacity of the Linux kernel project. >> > >> >Unfortunately that's impossible; we all know there aren't as many >> >women programmers as there are men. > In some countries, though not all. > > But we also know (or should realise) that the gender ratio among > programmers in general is much less unbalanced than in some free > software communities including the Linux kernel developers. > Just a couple of data points to add. When I was in graduate school in Israel, we had more women doing their phd then men. Not a huge sample, but it was interesting. The counter sample is the number of coding women we have at Red Hat in the kernel team. We are around zero per cent. Certainly a sign that we need to do better, regardless of the broader community challenges... Ric ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-21 13:22 ` Ric Wheeler @ 2013-07-23 1:26 ` Li Zefan 2013-07-23 1:39 ` Steven Rostedt 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Li Zefan @ 2013-07-23 1:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ric Wheeler Cc: Ben Hutchings, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Felipe Contreras, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Ingo Molnar, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Willy Tarreau On 2013/7/21 21:22, Ric Wheeler wrote: > On 07/20/2013 01:04 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote: >> n Fri, 2013-07-19 at 13:42 -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: >>> >On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Ingo Molnar<mingo@kernel.org> wrote: >>>> > > >>>> > >* Felipe Contreras<felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > >>>>> > >>As Linus already pointed out, not everybody has to work with everybody. >>>> > > >>>> > >That's not the point though, the point is to potentially roughly double >>>> > >the creative brain capacity of the Linux kernel project. >>> > >>> >Unfortunately that's impossible; we all know there aren't as many >>> >women programmers as there are men. >> In some countries, though not all. >> >> But we also know (or should realise) that the gender ratio among >> programmers in general is much less unbalanced than in some free >> software communities including the Linux kernel developers. >> > > Just a couple of data points to add. > > When I was in graduate school in Israel, we had more women doing their phd then men. Not a huge sample, but it was interesting. > > The counter sample is the number of coding women we have at Red Hat in the kernel team. We are around zero per cent. Certainly a sign that we need to do better, regardless of the broader community challenges... > IT companies in China, they try to make sure there's at least one (most the time the result is just one) female developer/tester in a team, and a team is ~10 people. Even if it's a kernel team, but it's harder to meet. Don't know if the same strategy is applied in other countries. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-23 1:26 ` Li Zefan @ 2013-07-23 1:39 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-23 2:04 ` Li Zefan 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-23 1:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Li Zefan Cc: Ric Wheeler, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Felipe Contreras, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Willy Tarreau, Linus Torvalds, Chris Ball, Ingo Molnar On Tue, 2013-07-23 at 09:26 +0800, Li Zefan wrote: > IT companies in China, they try to make sure there's at least one (most the > time the result is just one) female developer/tester in a team, and a team > is ~10 people. Even if it's a kernel team, but it's harder to meet. > > Don't know if the same strategy is applied in other countries. Just my observation, but it seems that I see more women in tech from the Asian countries than from the US. Watching my two teenage daughters grow up here as well as their friends, the focus of our schools still seem more bent on being good in sports than in academics, and even worse for science. Sports for girls happen to be much more serious than when I was in school. Being a "nerd" for a boy is starting to get a bit more acceptance (see Big Bang Theory), but for girls they seem a bit more harsh. At least from what I can tell by watching how things are with my kids and their friends. One of the friends of my daughter, who does very well in school, hides her grades and "pretends" to be stupid. This is really a sad state of affairs if you ask me :-( -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-23 1:39 ` Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-23 2:04 ` Li Zefan 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Li Zefan @ 2013-07-23 2:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Ric Wheeler, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Felipe Contreras, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Willy Tarreau, Linus Torvalds, Chris Ball, Ingo Molnar On 2013/7/23 9:39, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 2013-07-23 at 09:26 +0800, Li Zefan wrote: > >> IT companies in China, they try to make sure there's at least one (most the >> time the result is just one) female developer/tester in a team, and a team >> is ~10 people. Even if it's a kernel team, but it's harder to meet. >> >> Don't know if the same strategy is applied in other countries. > > Just my observation, but it seems that I see more women in tech from the > Asian countries than from the US. > > Watching my two teenage daughters grow up here as well as their friends, > the focus of our schools still seem more bent on being good in sports > than in academics, and even worse for science. Sports for girls happen > to be much more serious than when I was in school. Being a "nerd" for a > boy is starting to get a bit more acceptance (see Big Bang Theory), but > for girls they seem a bit more harsh. At least from what I can tell by > watching how things are with my kids and their friends. One of the > friends of my daughter, who does very well in school, hides her grades > and "pretends" to be stupid. This is really a sad state of affairs if > you ask me :-( > In china we are in the opposite. In college girls like to stay in school library to study, and in general they get better scores than boys, and they don't like sports. But being good in study is not the same as being good at programming, and in fact they are not keen in coding! And I think IT companies in China tend to lower their requirements when the job interviewee is a female. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 14:40 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-17 15:12 ` Felipe Contreras @ 2013-07-17 22:02 ` Guenter Roeck 2013-07-17 22:49 ` Randy Dunlap 1 sibling, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Guenter Roeck @ 2013-07-17 22:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: Felipe Contreras, Stefano Stabellini, H. Peter Anvin, Steven Rostedt, Chris Ball, Darren Hart, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, ksummit-2013-discuss, Willy Tarreau On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 07:40:43AM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: [ ... ] > > The result: 75% of their developers are women. If you give a flying > fuck about diversity, and want to attract women to your open source The f word is considered highly offensive in some cultures. Granted its use is now far more spread than it used to be, but it seems interesting to me that you of all people use a word which I personally would never use at all, much less in front of a woman. Sounds like a contradiction to me, especially when you use it while arguing for a more civil discussion. Do you think you need to use that word to make a point ? If so, why do you want to take that right away from others ? Guenter ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 22:02 ` Guenter Roeck @ 2013-07-17 22:49 ` Randy Dunlap 2013-07-17 23:08 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] " Paul E. McKenney 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Randy Dunlap @ 2013-07-17 22:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Guenter Roeck Cc: Sarah Sharp, Felipe Contreras, Stefano Stabellini, H. Peter Anvin, Steven Rostedt, Chris Ball, Darren Hart, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, ksummit-2013-discuss, Willy Tarreau On 07/17/13 15:02, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 07:40:43AM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > [ ... ] >> >> The result: 75% of their developers are women. If you give a flying >> fuck about diversity, and want to attract women to your open source > > The f word is considered highly offensive in some cultures. Granted its use is > now far more spread than it used to be, but it seems interesting to me that you > of all people use a word which I personally would never use at all, much less > in front of a woman. Sounds like a contradiction to me, especially when you use > it while arguing for a more civil discussion. > > Do you think you need to use that word to make a point ? If so, why do you want > to take that right away from others ? Thank you for your comment. (seriously) and Dave Miller's as well. -- ~Randy ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 22:49 ` Randy Dunlap @ 2013-07-17 23:08 ` Paul E. McKenney 2013-07-17 23:19 ` Guenter Roeck 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Paul E. McKenney @ 2013-07-17 23:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Randy Dunlap Cc: Guenter Roeck, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Felipe Contreras, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, stable, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 03:49:23PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > On 07/17/13 15:02, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 07:40:43AM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > > > [ ... ] > >> > >> The result: 75% of their developers are women. If you give a flying > >> fuck about diversity, and want to attract women to your open source > > > > The f word is considered highly offensive in some cultures. Granted its use is > > now far more spread than it used to be, but it seems interesting to me that you > > of all people use a word which I personally would never use at all, much less > > in front of a woman. Sounds like a contradiction to me, especially when you use > > it while arguing for a more civil discussion. > > > > Do you think you need to use that word to make a point ? If so, why do you want > > to take that right away from others ? > > Thank you for your comment. (seriously) > > and Dave Miller's as well. The USA social conventions have changed quite significantly over the past 50 years, haven't they? But that is OK, the younger people on this list will likely have the opportunity to experience far greater changes over the next 50 years, especially given increasing fractions of people's life experiences being publicly recorded. It would be interesting to see how they react, but I probably won't be around to witness it. ;-) Thanx, Paul ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 23:08 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] " Paul E. McKenney @ 2013-07-17 23:19 ` Guenter Roeck 2013-07-18 0:57 ` Paul E. McKenney 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Guenter Roeck @ 2013-07-17 23:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paul E. McKenney Cc: Randy Dunlap, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Felipe Contreras, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, stable, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 04:08:31PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 03:49:23PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > > On 07/17/13 15:02, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 07:40:43AM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > > > > > [ ... ] > > >> > > >> The result: 75% of their developers are women. If you give a flying > > >> fuck about diversity, and want to attract women to your open source > > > > > > The f word is considered highly offensive in some cultures. Granted its use is > > > now far more spread than it used to be, but it seems interesting to me that you > > > of all people use a word which I personally would never use at all, much less > > > in front of a woman. Sounds like a contradiction to me, especially when you use > > > it while arguing for a more civil discussion. > > > > > > Do you think you need to use that word to make a point ? If so, why do you want > > > to take that right away from others ? > > > > Thank you for your comment. (seriously) > > > > and Dave Miller's as well. > > The USA social conventions have changed quite significantly over the past > 50 years, haven't they? But that is OK, the younger people on this list > will likely have the opportunity to experience far greater changes over > the next 50 years, especially given increasing fractions of people's > life experiences being publicly recorded. It would be interesting to > see how they react, but I probably won't be around to witness it. ;-) > My kids use the word all the time, and look at me with an odd face if I point out that it is not a nice word to use (for me). Several people I know and respect seem to be unable to say a sentence without using it. So, yes, I am aware that times are changing, and that my cultural context is different than that of the culture I am living in. But that isn't the point here. Guenter ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 23:19 ` Guenter Roeck @ 2013-07-18 0:57 ` Paul E. McKenney 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Paul E. McKenney @ 2013-07-18 0:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Guenter Roeck Cc: Randy Dunlap, ksummit-2013-discuss, Stefano Stabellini, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Felipe Contreras, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, stable, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 04:19:34PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 04:08:31PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 03:49:23PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > > > On 07/17/13 15:02, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 07:40:43AM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > > > > > > > [ ... ] > > > >> > > > >> The result: 75% of their developers are women. If you give a flying > > > >> fuck about diversity, and want to attract women to your open source > > > > > > > > The f word is considered highly offensive in some cultures. Granted its use is > > > > now far more spread than it used to be, but it seems interesting to me that you > > > > of all people use a word which I personally would never use at all, much less > > > > in front of a woman. Sounds like a contradiction to me, especially when you use > > > > it while arguing for a more civil discussion. > > > > > > > > Do you think you need to use that word to make a point ? If so, why do you want > > > > to take that right away from others ? > > > > > > Thank you for your comment. (seriously) > > > > > > and Dave Miller's as well. > > > > The USA social conventions have changed quite significantly over the past > > 50 years, haven't they? But that is OK, the younger people on this list > > will likely have the opportunity to experience far greater changes over > > the next 50 years, especially given increasing fractions of people's > > life experiences being publicly recorded. It would be interesting to > > see how they react, but I probably won't be around to witness it. ;-) > > > My kids use the word all the time, and look at me with an odd face if I point out > that it is not a nice word to use (for me). Several people I know and respect > seem to be unable to say a sentence without using it. So, yes, I am aware that > times are changing, and that my cultural context is different than that of the > culture I am living in. But that isn't the point here. Heh! If I were to ask each of the N participants in this thread what the point was, would I get fewer than N different answers? ;-) Thanx, Paul ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-16 15:49 ` Stefano Stabellini 2013-07-16 16:16 ` Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-17 8:04 ` Dan Carpenter 1 sibling, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Dan Carpenter @ 2013-07-17 8:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Stefano Stabellini Cc: H. Peter Anvin, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, stable, Chris Ball, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 04:49:27PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > The etiquette on the lkml is by far the roughest of them all. It's the > "bad neighborhood with guns" of the Open Source world. You never know > when you are going to get a bullet, but sooner or later you'll get one. Only Andrew Morton actually reads LKML. These days kernel dev work takes place on subsystem lists. I wonder if some mailing lists are worse than others? From what I have seen people are mostly civil. regards, dan carpenter ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) 2013-07-15 22:36 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-15 23:49 ` Darren Hart @ 2013-07-16 7:32 ` David Lang 2013-07-16 9:14 ` Olivier Galibert 1 sibling, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: David Lang @ 2013-07-16 7:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: Steven Rostedt, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, Darren Hart, ksummit-2013-discuss, Willy Tarreau On Mon, 15 Jul 2013, Sarah Sharp wrote: > The people who want to work together in a civil manner should get > together and create a "Kernel maintainer's code of conduct" that > outlines what they expect from fellow kernel developers. The people who > want to continue acting "unprofessionally" should document what > behaviors set off their cursing streaks, so that others can avoid that > behavior. Somewhere in the middle is the community behavior all > developers can thrive in. By defining your viewpoint as being "professional" and the other viewpoint as being "unprofessional" you have already started using very loaded terms and greatly reduces the probability of actually getting the other group to agree and participate. As has been said elsewhere, almost all the attacks are against code, not people. There are occasional outbursts at the more experienced/trusted people along the lines of "you should know better than to do that", and while there is heat there, there is also a lot of truth. If those people can't be trusted not to do the wrong things, then we are back to the time when Linus had to review every patch himself and we hit that wall quite hard. People do need to be called out on their mistakes. In companies, if you don't fire managers who do the wrong thing soon enough, it can ruin the company. In kernel development, you have a very large number of observers and if they don't see people being corrected for doing the wrong thing, they will emulate it. I find that frequently the most educational discussions to read are the 'heated' ones, they are the ones where the 'right' and 'wrong' processes are most clearly explained, not just in terms of what the processes are, but also the WHY of the process being 'right' or 'wrong'. If Linus just snaps at someone and they say 'oops, missed that', it's no big deal for anyone. But when a full argument/discussion takes place, a lot more people learn and apply the lessons to their own work. David Lang ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) 2013-07-16 7:32 ` [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) David Lang @ 2013-07-16 9:14 ` Olivier Galibert 2013-07-16 21:12 ` Sarah Sharp 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Olivier Galibert @ 2013-07-16 9:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David Lang Cc: Sarah Sharp, Steven Rostedt, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, Darren Hart, ksummit-2013-discuss, Willy Tarreau On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 9:32 AM, David Lang <david@lang.hm> wrote: > On Mon, 15 Jul 2013, Sarah Sharp wrote: > >> The people who want to work together in a civil manner should get >> together and create a "Kernel maintainer's code of conduct" that >> outlines what they expect from fellow kernel developers. The people who >> want to continue acting "unprofessionally" should document what >> behaviors set off their cursing streaks, so that others can avoid that >> behavior. Somewhere in the middle is the community behavior all >> developers can thrive in. > > > By defining your viewpoint as being "professional" and the other viewpoint > as being "unprofessional" you have already started using very loaded terms > and greatly reduces the probability of actually getting the other group to > agree and participate. Especially since you can very easily translate these terms into "American" and "non-American". The stereotypical american professionalism attitude is to be polite at the word choice level the best to hide a profund disrespect under them. There's no meaning taken into account, it's just keyword spotting. "Your code is crap" is considered unprofessional, while "Let's leverage my fifth grade nephew's capabilities to assist you in fixing the code" is perfectly professional, somehow. That's more often than not an unacceptable attitude in europe. OG. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) 2013-07-16 9:14 ` Olivier Galibert @ 2013-07-16 21:12 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-16 21:27 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] " Theodore Ts'o 2013-07-16 22:18 ` [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) Willy Tarreau 0 siblings, 2 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-16 21:12 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Olivier Galibert Cc: David Lang, Steven Rostedt, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, Darren Hart, ksummit-2013-discuss, Willy Tarreau On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 11:14:51AM +0200, Olivier Galibert wrote: > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 9:32 AM, David Lang <david@lang.hm> wrote: > > On Mon, 15 Jul 2013, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > > >> The people who want to work together in a civil manner should get > >> together and create a "Kernel maintainer's code of conduct" that > >> outlines what they expect from fellow kernel developers. The people who > >> want to continue acting "unprofessionally" should document what > >> behaviors set off their cursing streaks, so that others can avoid that > >> behavior. Somewhere in the middle is the community behavior all > >> developers can thrive in. > > > > > > By defining your viewpoint as being "professional" and the other viewpoint > > as being "unprofessional" you have already started using very loaded terms > > and greatly reduces the probability of actually getting the other group to > > agree and participate. > > Especially since you can very easily translate these terms into > "American" and "non-American". > > The stereotypical american professionalism attitude is to be polite at > the word choice level the best to hide a profund disrespect under > them. There's no meaning taken into account, it's just keyword > spotting. "Your code is crap" is considered unprofessional, while > "Let's leverage my fifth grade nephew's capabilities to assist you in > fixing the code" is perfectly professional, somehow. That's more > often than not an unacceptable attitude in europe. I *hate* both direct personal insults and indirect personal insults. Neither should be acceptable in our community. As I stated in an email to Rusty, what I'm objecting to here is not kernel developers criticizing code. I'm objecting to personal attacks, and developers directing personal verbal abuse towards each other. This include all developers, not just Linus. Sarah Sharp ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) 2013-07-16 21:12 ` Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-16 21:27 ` Theodore Ts'o 2013-07-16 22:43 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-16 22:18 ` [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) Willy Tarreau 1 sibling, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Theodore Ts'o @ 2013-07-16 21:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: Olivier Galibert, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, stable, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 02:12:35PM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > "Your code is crap" is considered unprofessional, while > > "Let's leverage my fifth grade nephew's capabilities to assist you in > > fixing the code" is perfectly professional, somehow. That's more > > often than not an unacceptable attitude in europe. > > I *hate* both direct personal insults and indirect personal insults. > Neither should be acceptable in our community. What is a "direct personal insult" can be in the eye of the beholder. Personally, I don't consider "your code is crap" as a personal insult. "You are an incompetent programmer for producing this crap" would be a personal attack. Similarly, there is a difference between "That was an idiotic idea" and "You are an idiot". Now, there are certainly more {diplomatic, politically correct, choose-your-own-favorite-adjective} ways wording the description of a particularly bad idea or piece of code. But is that a "personal attack"? Keep in mind that there are some cultures where even pointing out a technical flaw in code might considered bringing deep shame on the engineer and their company. So how sensitive people are to criticism during an electronic exchange is always going to be highly culutrally and personally variable. - Ted ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) 2013-07-16 21:27 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] " Theodore Ts'o @ 2013-07-16 22:43 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-16 22:54 ` Steven Rostedt ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-16 22:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Theodore Ts'o Cc: Olivier Galibert, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, stable, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 05:27:04PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 02:12:35PM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > "Your code is crap" is considered unprofessional, while > > > "Let's leverage my fifth grade nephew's capabilities to assist you in > > > fixing the code" is perfectly professional, somehow. That's more > > > often than not an unacceptable attitude in europe. > > > > I *hate* both direct personal insults and indirect personal insults. > > Neither should be acceptable in our community. > > What is a "direct personal insult" can be in the eye of the beholder. > Personally, I don't consider "your code is crap" as a personal insult. > "You are an incompetent programmer for producing this crap" would be a > personal attack. > > Similarly, there is a difference between "That was an idiotic idea" > and "You are an idiot". > > Now, there are certainly more {diplomatic, politically correct, > choose-your-own-favorite-adjective} ways wording the description of a > particularly bad idea or piece of code. But is that a "personal > attack"? I don't think we disagree on this, Ted. I've stated that I view personal attacks and insults negatively, and I don't see an issue with pointing out that code is bad. I think you're agreeing with me on this. > Keep in mind that there are some cultures where even pointing out a > technical flaw in code might considered bringing deep shame on the > engineer and their company. So how sensitive people are to criticism > during an electronic exchange is always going to be highly culutrally > and personally variable. Yes, that's true. Some kernel developers are better at moderating their comments and tone towards individuals who are "sensitive". Others simply don't give a shit. So we need to figure out how to meet somewhere in the middle, in order to establish a baseline of civility. Sarah Sharp ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) 2013-07-16 22:43 ` Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-16 22:54 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-16 23:12 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-16 23:01 ` Randy Dunlap 2013-07-16 23:50 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) Theodore Ts'o 2 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-16 22:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: Theodore Ts'o, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Ingo Molnar, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linus Torvalds, Willy Tarreau On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 15:43 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > Yes, that's true. Some kernel developers are better at moderating their > comments and tone towards individuals who are "sensitive". Others > simply don't give a shit. So we need to figure out how to meet > somewhere in the middle, in order to establish a baseline of civility. I have to ask this because I'm thick, and don't really understand, but ... What problem exactly are we trying to solve here? -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) 2013-07-16 22:54 ` Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-16 23:12 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-16 23:31 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML Ric Wheeler ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-16 23:12 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Theodore Ts'o, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Ingo Molnar, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linus Torvalds, Willy Tarreau On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 06:54:59PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 15:43 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > > Yes, that's true. Some kernel developers are better at moderating their > > comments and tone towards individuals who are "sensitive". Others > > simply don't give a shit. So we need to figure out how to meet > > somewhere in the middle, in order to establish a baseline of civility. > > I have to ask this because I'm thick, and don't really understand, > but ... > > What problem exactly are we trying to solve here? Personal attacks are not cool Steve. Some people simply don't care if a verbal tirade is directed at them. Others do not want anyone to attack them personally, but they're fine with people attacking their code. Bystanders that don't understand the kernel community structure are discouraged from contributing because they don't want to be verbally abused, and they really don't want to see either personal attacks or intense belittling, demeaning comments about code. In order to make our community better, we need to figure out where the baseline of "good" behavior is. We need to define what behavior we want from both maintainers and patch submitters. E.g. "No regressions" and "don't break userspace" and "no personal attacks". That needs to be written down somewhere, and it isn't. If it's documented somewhere, point me to the file in Documentation. Hint: it's not there. That is the problem. Sarah Sharp ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-16 23:12 ` Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-16 23:31 ` Ric Wheeler 2013-07-16 23:53 ` Myklebust, Trond 2013-07-16 23:38 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) Steven Rostedt 2013-07-17 0:32 ` Jeff Liu 2 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Ric Wheeler @ 2013-07-16 23:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: Steven Rostedt, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On 07/16/2013 07:12 PM, Sarah Sharp wrote: > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 06:54:59PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: >> On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 15:43 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: >> >>> Yes, that's true. Some kernel developers are better at moderating their >>> comments and tone towards individuals who are "sensitive". Others >>> simply don't give a shit. So we need to figure out how to meet >>> somewhere in the middle, in order to establish a baseline of civility. >> I have to ask this because I'm thick, and don't really understand, >> but ... >> >> What problem exactly are we trying to solve here? > Personal attacks are not cool Steve. Some people simply don't care if a > verbal tirade is directed at them. Others do not want anyone to attack > them personally, but they're fine with people attacking their code. > > Bystanders that don't understand the kernel community structure are > discouraged from contributing because they don't want to be verbally > abused, and they really don't want to see either personal attacks or > intense belittling, demeaning comments about code. > > In order to make our community better, we need to figure out where the > baseline of "good" behavior is. We need to define what behavior we want > from both maintainers and patch submitters. E.g. "No regressions" and > "don't break userspace" and "no personal attacks". That needs to be > written down somewhere, and it isn't. If it's documented somewhere, > point me to the file in Documentation. Hint: it's not there. > > That is the problem. > > Sarah Sharp The problem you are pointing out - and it is a problem - makes us less effective as a community. Getting the balance right is clearly difficult in a large, diverse community, but I do think that the key is to focus criticism on the code or technical arguments and avoid attacks on the individual. Being direct and funny in a critique is not the core of the issue, Ric ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-16 23:31 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML Ric Wheeler @ 2013-07-16 23:53 ` Myklebust, Trond 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Myklebust, Trond @ 2013-07-16 23:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ric Wheeler Cc: Sarah Sharp, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Ingo Molnar, Olivier Galibert, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Linus Torvalds, Willy Tarreau [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8", Size: 2659 bytes --] On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 19:31 -0400, Ric Wheeler wrote: > On 07/16/2013 07:12 PM, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 06:54:59PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > >> On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 15:43 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > >> > >>> Yes, that's true. Some kernel developers are better at moderating their > >>> comments and tone towards individuals who are "sensitive". Others > >>> simply don't give a shit. So we need to figure out how to meet > >>> somewhere in the middle, in order to establish a baseline of civility. > >> I have to ask this because I'm thick, and don't really understand, > >> but ... > >> > >> What problem exactly are we trying to solve here? > > Personal attacks are not cool Steve. Some people simply don't care if a > > verbal tirade is directed at them. Others do not want anyone to attack > > them personally, but they're fine with people attacking their code. > > > > Bystanders that don't understand the kernel community structure are > > discouraged from contributing because they don't want to be verbally > > abused, and they really don't want to see either personal attacks or > > intense belittling, demeaning comments about code. > > > > In order to make our community better, we need to figure out where the > > baseline of "good" behavior is. We need to define what behavior we want > > from both maintainers and patch submitters. E.g. "No regressions" and > > "don't break userspace" and "no personal attacks". That needs to be > > written down somewhere, and it isn't. If it's documented somewhere, > > point me to the file in Documentation. Hint: it's not there. > > > > That is the problem. > > > > Sarah Sharp > > The problem you are pointing out - and it is a problem - makes us less effective > as a community. Not really. Most of the people who already work as part of this community are completely used to it. We've created the environment, and have no problems with it. Where it could possibly be a problem is when it comes to recruiting _new_ members to our community. Particularly so given that some journalists take a special pleasure in reporting particularly juicy comments and antics. That would tend to scare off a lot of gun-shy newbies. On the other hand, it might tend to bias our recruitment toward people of a more "special" disposition. Perhaps we finally need the services of a social scientist to help us find out... -- Trond Myklebust Linux NFS client maintainer NetApp Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com www.netapp.com ÿôèº{.nÇ+·®+%Ëÿ±éݶ\x17¥wÿº{.nÇ+·¥{±þG«éÿ{ayº\x1dÊÚë,j\a¢f£¢·hïêÿêçz_è®\x03(éÝ¢j"ú\x1a¶^[m§ÿÿ¾\a«þG«éÿ¢¸?¨èÚ&£ø§~á¶iOæ¬z·vØ^\x14\x04\x1a¶^[m§ÿÿÃ\fÿ¶ìÿ¢¸?I¥ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML @ 2013-07-16 23:53 ` Myklebust, Trond 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Myklebust, Trond @ 2013-07-16 23:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ric Wheeler Cc: Sarah Sharp, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Ingo Molnar, Olivier Galibert, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Linus Torvalds, Willy Tarreau On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 19:31 -0400, Ric Wheeler wrote: > On 07/16/2013 07:12 PM, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 06:54:59PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > >> On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 15:43 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > >> > >>> Yes, that's true. Some kernel developers are better at moderating their > >>> comments and tone towards individuals who are "sensitive". Others > >>> simply don't give a shit. So we need to figure out how to meet > >>> somewhere in the middle, in order to establish a baseline of civility. > >> I have to ask this because I'm thick, and don't really understand, > >> but ... > >> > >> What problem exactly are we trying to solve here? > > Personal attacks are not cool Steve. Some people simply don't care if a > > verbal tirade is directed at them. Others do not want anyone to attack > > them personally, but they're fine with people attacking their code. > > > > Bystanders that don't understand the kernel community structure are > > discouraged from contributing because they don't want to be verbally > > abused, and they really don't want to see either personal attacks or > > intense belittling, demeaning comments about code. > > > > In order to make our community better, we need to figure out where the > > baseline of "good" behavior is. We need to define what behavior we want > > from both maintainers and patch submitters. E.g. "No regressions" and > > "don't break userspace" and "no personal attacks". That needs to be > > written down somewhere, and it isn't. If it's documented somewhere, > > point me to the file in Documentation. Hint: it's not there. > > > > That is the problem. > > > > Sarah Sharp > > The problem you are pointing out - and it is a problem - makes us less effective > as a community. Not really. Most of the people who already work as part of this community are completely used to it. We've created the environment, and have no problems with it. Where it could possibly be a problem is when it comes to recruiting _new_ members to our community. Particularly so given that some journalists take a special pleasure in reporting particularly juicy comments and antics. That would tend to scare off a lot of gun-shy newbies. On the other hand, it might tend to bias our recruitment toward people of a more "special" disposition. Perhaps we finally need the services of a social scientist to help us find out... -- Trond Myklebust Linux NFS client maintainer NetApp Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com www.netapp.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-16 23:53 ` Myklebust, Trond @ 2013-07-17 1:21 ` Ric Wheeler -1 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Ric Wheeler @ 2013-07-17 1:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Myklebust, Trond Cc: Sarah Sharp, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Ingo Molnar, Olivier Galibert, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Linus Torvalds, Willy Tarreau On 07/16/2013 07:53 PM, Myklebust, Trond wrote: > On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 19:31 -0400, Ric Wheeler wrote: >> On 07/16/2013 07:12 PM, Sarah Sharp wrote: >>> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 06:54:59PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: >>>> On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 15:43 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: >>>> >>>>> Yes, that's true. Some kernel developers are better at moderating their >>>>> comments and tone towards individuals who are "sensitive". Others >>>>> simply don't give a shit. So we need to figure out how to meet >>>>> somewhere in the middle, in order to establish a baseline of civility. >>>> I have to ask this because I'm thick, and don't really understand, >>>> but ... >>>> >>>> What problem exactly are we trying to solve here? >>> Personal attacks are not cool Steve. Some people simply don't care if a >>> verbal tirade is directed at them. Others do not want anyone to attack >>> them personally, but they're fine with people attacking their code. >>> >>> Bystanders that don't understand the kernel community structure are >>> discouraged from contributing because they don't want to be verbally >>> abused, and they really don't want to see either personal attacks or >>> intense belittling, demeaning comments about code. >>> >>> In order to make our community better, we need to figure out where the >>> baseline of "good" behavior is. We need to define what behavior we want >>> from both maintainers and patch submitters. E.g. "No regressions" and >>> "don't break userspace" and "no personal attacks". That needs to be >>> written down somewhere, and it isn't. If it's documented somewhere, >>> point me to the file in Documentation. Hint: it's not there. >>> >>> That is the problem. >>> >>> Sarah Sharp >> The problem you are pointing out - and it is a problem - makes us less effective >> as a community. > Not really. Most of the people who already work as part of this > community are completely used to it. We've created the environment, and > have no problems with it. You should never judge success by being popular with those people who are already contributing and put up with things. If you did that in business, you would never reach new customers. > > Where it could possibly be a problem is when it comes to recruiting > _new_ members to our community. Particularly so given that some > journalists take a special pleasure in reporting particularly juicy > comments and antics. That would tend to scare off a lot of gun-shy > newbies. That is my point - recruiting new members is made harder. As some one who manages *a lot* of upstream kernel developers, I will add that it is not just new comers that find this occasionally offensive and off putting. > On the other hand, it might tend to bias our recruitment toward people > of a more "special" disposition. Perhaps we finally need the services of > a social scientist to help us find out... > To be fair, we usually do very well at this, especially with new comers to our community. I think that most of the problems come up between people who know each other quite well and are friendly with each other in person. The problem is that when you use language that you would use with good friends over drinks to tell them they are being stupid and do that on a public list, you set a tone that reaches far beyond your intended target. All of those new comers also read this list and do not see it as funny or friendly. I really don't think that we have to be politically correct or overly kind to make things better. As a very low bar, we could start by trying to avoid using language that would get you fired when you send off an email to someone that you have power over (either manage directly or indirectly control their career). Ric ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML @ 2013-07-17 1:21 ` Ric Wheeler 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Ric Wheeler @ 2013-07-17 1:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Myklebust, Trond Cc: Sarah Sharp, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Ingo Molnar, Olivier Galibert, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Linus Torvalds, Willy Tarreau On 07/16/2013 07:53 PM, Myklebust, Trond wrote: > On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 19:31 -0400, Ric Wheeler wrote: >> On 07/16/2013 07:12 PM, Sarah Sharp wrote: >>> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 06:54:59PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: >>>> On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 15:43 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: >>>> >>>>> Yes, that's true. Some kernel developers are better at moderating their >>>>> comments and tone towards individuals who are "sensitive". Others >>>>> simply don't give a shit. So we need to figure out how to meet >>>>> somewhere in the middle, in order to establish a baseline of civility. >>>> I have to ask this because I'm thick, and don't really understand, >>>> but ... >>>> >>>> What problem exactly are we trying to solve here? >>> Personal attacks are not cool Steve. Some people simply don't care if a >>> verbal tirade is directed at them. Others do not want anyone to attack >>> them personally, but they're fine with people attacking their code. >>> >>> Bystanders that don't understand the kernel community structure are >>> discouraged from contributing because they don't want to be verbally >>> abused, and they really don't want to see either personal attacks or >>> intense belittling, demeaning comments about code. >>> >>> In order to make our community better, we need to figure out where the >>> baseline of "good" behavior is. We need to define what behavior we want >>> from both maintainers and patch submitters. E.g. "No regressions" and >>> "don't break userspace" and "no personal attacks". That needs to be >>> written down somewhere, and it isn't. If it's documented somewhere, >>> point me to the file in Documentation. Hint: it's not there. >>> >>> That is the problem. >>> >>> Sarah Sharp >> The problem you are pointing out - and it is a problem - makes us less effective >> as a community. > Not really. Most of the people who already work as part of this > community are completely used to it. We've created the environment, and > have no problems with it. You should never judge success by being popular with those people who are already contributing and put up with things. If you did that in business, you would never reach new customers. > > Where it could possibly be a problem is when it comes to recruiting > _new_ members to our community. Particularly so given that some > journalists take a special pleasure in reporting particularly juicy > comments and antics. That would tend to scare off a lot of gun-shy > newbies. That is my point - recruiting new members is made harder. As some one who manages *a lot* of upstream kernel developers, I will add that it is not just new comers that find this occasionally offensive and off putting. > On the other hand, it might tend to bias our recruitment toward people > of a more "special" disposition. Perhaps we finally need the services of > a social scientist to help us find out... > To be fair, we usually do very well at this, especially with new comers to our community. I think that most of the problems come up between people who know each other quite well and are friendly with each other in person. The problem is that when you use language that you would use with good friends over drinks to tell them they are being stupid and do that on a public list, you set a tone that reaches far beyond your intended target. All of those new comers also read this list and do not see it as funny or friendly. I really don't think that we have to be politically correct or overly kind to make things better. As a very low bar, we could start by trying to avoid using language that would get you fired when you send off an email to someone that you have power over (either manage directly or indirectly control their career). Ric ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-16 23:53 ` Myklebust, Trond (?) (?) @ 2013-07-17 7:36 ` CAI Qian 2013-07-17 14:48 ` Sarah Sharp -1 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: CAI Qian @ 2013-07-17 7:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Trond Myklebust Cc: Ric Wheeler, Sarah Sharp, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Ingo Molnar, Olivier Galibert, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Linus Torvalds, Willy Tarreau ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Trond Myklebust" <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com> > To: "Ric Wheeler" <ricwheeler@gmail.com> > Cc: "Sarah Sharp" <sarah.a.sharp@linux.intel.com>, "David Lang" <david@lang.hm>, > ksummit-2013-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org, "Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, "Darren Hart" > <dvhart@linux.intel.com>, "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@kernel.org>, "Olivier Galibert" <galibert@pobox.com>, "Linux Kernel > Mailing List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "stable" <stable@vger.kernel.org>, "Linus Torvalds" > <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>, "Willy Tarreau" <w@1wt.eu> > Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 7:53:30 AM > Subject: Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML > > On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 19:31 -0400, Ric Wheeler wrote: > > On 07/16/2013 07:12 PM, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 06:54:59PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > >> On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 15:43 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > >> > > >>> Yes, that's true. Some kernel developers are better at moderating > > >>> their > > >>> comments and tone towards individuals who are "sensitive". Others > > >>> simply don't give a shit. So we need to figure out how to meet > > >>> somewhere in the middle, in order to establish a baseline of civility. > > >> I have to ask this because I'm thick, and don't really understand, > > >> but ... > > >> > > >> What problem exactly are we trying to solve here? > > > Personal attacks are not cool Steve. Some people simply don't care if a > > > verbal tirade is directed at them. Others do not want anyone to attack > > > them personally, but they're fine with people attacking their code. > > > > > > Bystanders that don't understand the kernel community structure are > > > discouraged from contributing because they don't want to be verbally > > > abused, and they really don't want to see either personal attacks or > > > intense belittling, demeaning comments about code. > > > > > > In order to make our community better, we need to figure out where the > > > baseline of "good" behavior is. We need to define what behavior we want > > > from both maintainers and patch submitters. E.g. "No regressions" and > > > "don't break userspace" and "no personal attacks". That needs to be > > > written down somewhere, and it isn't. If it's documented somewhere, > > > point me to the file in Documentation. Hint: it's not there. > > > > > > That is the problem. > > > > > > Sarah Sharp > > > > The problem you are pointing out - and it is a problem - makes us less > > effective > > as a community. > > Not really. Most of the people who already work as part of this > community are completely used to it. We've created the environment, and > have no problems with it. > > Where it could possibly be a problem is when it comes to recruiting > _new_ members to our community. Particularly so given that some > journalists take a special pleasure in reporting particularly juicy > comments and antics. That would tend to scare off a lot of gun-shy > newbies. > On the other hand, it might tend to bias our recruitment toward people > of a more "special" disposition. Perhaps we finally need the services of > a social scientist to help us find out... Does that sound like there are not going to have enough direct/thick skin new kernel developers around to maintain the future Linux community? Maybe just need a better pipeline for people comfortable for this culture? > > -- > Trond Myklebust > Linux NFS client maintainer > > NetApp > Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com > www.netapp.com > N�����r��y���b�X��ǧv�^�){.n�+������z)���w*jg��������ݢj/���z�ޖ��2�ޙ���&�)ߡ�a��\x7f���G���h��j:+v���w�٥ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 7:36 ` CAI Qian @ 2013-07-17 14:48 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-17 15:09 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-18 3:00 ` CAI Qian 0 siblings, 2 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-17 14:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: CAI Qian Cc: Trond Myklebust, Ric Wheeler, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Ingo Molnar, Olivier Galibert, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Linus Torvalds, Willy Tarreau On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 03:36:36AM -0400, CAI Qian wrote: > > On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 19:31 -0400, Ric Wheeler wrote: > > > On 07/16/2013 07:12 PM, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 06:54:59PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > >> On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 15:43 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > > > In order to make our community better, we need to figure out where the > > > > baseline of "good" behavior is. We need to define what behavior we want > > > > from both maintainers and patch submitters. E.g. "No regressions" and > > > > "don't break userspace" and "no personal attacks". That needs to be > > > > written down somewhere, and it isn't. If it's documented somewhere, > > > > point me to the file in Documentation. Hint: it's not there. > > > > > > > > That is the problem. > > > > > > > > Sarah Sharp > > > > > > The problem you are pointing out - and it is a problem - makes us less > > > effective > > > as a community. > > > > Not really. Most of the people who already work as part of this > > community are completely used to it. We've created the environment, and > > have no problems with it. > > > > Where it could possibly be a problem is when it comes to recruiting > > _new_ members to our community. Particularly so given that some > > journalists take a special pleasure in reporting particularly juicy > > comments and antics. That would tend to scare off a lot of gun-shy > > newbies. > > > > On the other hand, it might tend to bias our recruitment toward people > > of a more "special" disposition. Perhaps we finally need the services of > > a social scientist to help us find out... > > Does that sound like there are not going to have enough direct/thick skin > new kernel developers around to maintain the future Linux community? Maybe > just need a better pipeline for people comfortable for this culture? No, we don't need a better pipeline for people who can "put up with shit". We need a better pipeline for people who can work together civilly, and still get shit done. I'm working on getting a pipeline of women into kernel development, through the FOSS Outreach Program for Women. They slowly get introduced to Linux development culture, starting with a very friendly separate mailing list and IRC channel, and finally moving to work with a kernel mentor on a bigger project on the main Linux kernel development lists. We have seven women participating this round, and I suspect we'll have even more the next round. So deal with it. You're going to have a lot more women in the kernel community, and not all of them will be willing to put up with verbal abuse. If you want to attract top talent that also happen to be women or racial minorities, the verbal abuse needs to stop. Sarah Sharp ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 14:48 ` Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-17 15:09 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-17 17:00 ` Stefano Stabellini ` (2 more replies) 2013-07-18 3:00 ` CAI Qian 1 sibling, 3 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-17 15:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: CAI Qian, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 07:48 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > Does that sound like there are not going to have enough direct/thick skin > > new kernel developers around to maintain the future Linux community? Maybe > > just need a better pipeline for people comfortable for this culture? > > No, we don't need a better pipeline for people who can "put up with > shit". We need a better pipeline for people who can work together > civilly, and still get shit done. > > I'm working on getting a pipeline of women into kernel development, > through the FOSS Outreach Program for Women. They slowly get introduced > to Linux development culture, starting with a very friendly separate > mailing list and IRC channel, and finally moving to work with a kernel > mentor on a bigger project on the main Linux kernel development lists. > We have seven women participating this round, and I suspect we'll have > even more the next round. > > So deal with it. You're going to have a lot more women in the kernel > community, and not all of them will be willing to put up with verbal > abuse. If you want to attract top talent that also happen to be women > or racial minorities, the verbal abuse needs to stop. > I have to ask. How much verbal abuse have you received in LKML? And I don't mean in this thread. You pointed out a few examples of Linus, and it usually comes from someone that should know better being told not to do something, and they continue to do it, and then finally Linus blows up. Linus doesn't start his cursing at the first email. It takes a few to show that you deserve a blow up. Usually sensitive developers would listen the first time they are told. It's more of the thick skin developers that push the envelope. But I understand, its the "image" that bothers you. The scariest thing about Linux kernel development is that because its so successful, and the development is so open to the world (you are programming on a stage in a world theater), that thin skin people may not be comfortable in that environment. What we need are mentors, and educate people that Linux really isn't that harsh, and that the new developers actually do have talent, and shouldn't be afraid to post their code. The last thing I want to do is to lower the quality of the kernel just to get a wider range of developers. -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 15:09 ` Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-17 17:00 ` Stefano Stabellini 2013-07-17 17:15 ` Felipe Contreras ` (2 more replies) 2013-07-17 17:52 ` Willy Tarreau 2013-07-17 18:51 ` Sarah Sharp 2 siblings, 3 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Stefano Stabellini @ 2013-07-17 17:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Sarah Sharp, CAI Qian, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, 17 Jul 2013, Steven Rostedt wrote: > The last thing I want to do is to lower the quality of the kernel just > to get a wider range of developers. Can we stop bringing the quality of the code into the discussion? I think it's pretty clear that one doesn't need to be verbally abusive in order to stop bad code from getting into the kernel. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 17:00 ` Stefano Stabellini @ 2013-07-17 17:15 ` Felipe Contreras 2013-07-17 17:56 ` Stefano Stabellini 2013-07-17 17:28 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-17 17:57 ` Al Viro 2 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Felipe Contreras @ 2013-07-17 17:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Stefano Stabellini Cc: Steven Rostedt, Sarah Sharp, CAI Qian, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 12:00 PM, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> wrote: > On Wed, 17 Jul 2013, Steven Rostedt wrote: >> The last thing I want to do is to lower the quality of the kernel just >> to get a wider range of developers. > > Can we stop bringing the quality of the code into the discussion? Can you please stop calling open communication abuse? First you have to explain *why* it was improper in order to call it abuse, and in the few examples that have been shown, it has been explained that the behavior was justified (breaking the #1 rule by a lieutenant who should know better). > I think it's pretty clear that one doesn't need to be verbally abusive > in order to stop bad code from getting into the kernel. You can think whatever you want, others have already shown that changing the tone of the message in the examples would have changed the desired effect. -- Felipe Contreras ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 17:15 ` Felipe Contreras @ 2013-07-17 17:56 ` Stefano Stabellini 2013-07-17 18:05 ` Felipe Contreras 2013-07-17 18:42 ` Al Viro 0 siblings, 2 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Stefano Stabellini @ 2013-07-17 17:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Felipe Contreras Cc: Stefano Stabellini, Steven Rostedt, Sarah Sharp, CAI Qian, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, 17 Jul 2013, Felipe Contreras wrote: > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 12:00 PM, Stefano Stabellini > <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> wrote: > > On Wed, 17 Jul 2013, Steven Rostedt wrote: > >> The last thing I want to do is to lower the quality of the kernel just > >> to get a wider range of developers. > > > > Can we stop bringing the quality of the code into the discussion? > > Can you please stop calling open communication abuse? Open communication is one thing, abuse is another, so I agree with you there. > First you have > to explain *why* it was improper in order to call it abuse, and in the > few examples that have been shown, it has been explained that the > behavior was justified (breaking the #1 rule by a lieutenant who > should know better). Abuse is never justified, I hope that's clear for everybody. Two wrongs don't make a right. So we are down to the definition of verbal abuse. The Oxford dictionary gives me: "speak to (someone) in an insulting and offensive way" For example I think that calling somebody a moron qualifies. > > I think it's pretty clear that one doesn't need to be verbally abusive > > in order to stop bad code from getting into the kernel. > > You can think whatever you want, others have already shown that > changing the tone of the message in the examples would have changed > the desired effect. I disagree and it is certainly not the case in my experience. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 17:56 ` Stefano Stabellini @ 2013-07-17 18:05 ` Felipe Contreras 2013-07-17 18:42 ` Al Viro 1 sibling, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Felipe Contreras @ 2013-07-17 18:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Stefano Stabellini Cc: Steven Rostedt, Sarah Sharp, CAI Qian, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 12:56 PM, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> wrote: > On Wed, 17 Jul 2013, Felipe Contreras wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 12:00 PM, Stefano Stabellini >> <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> wrote: >> > On Wed, 17 Jul 2013, Steven Rostedt wrote: >> >> The last thing I want to do is to lower the quality of the kernel just >> >> to get a wider range of developers. >> > >> > Can we stop bringing the quality of the code into the discussion? >> >> Can you please stop calling open communication abuse? > > Open communication is one thing, abuse is another, so I agree with you > there. You call it abuse, others don't. >> First you have >> to explain *why* it was improper in order to call it abuse, and in the >> few examples that have been shown, it has been explained that the >> behavior was justified (breaking the #1 rule by a lieutenant who >> should know better). > > Abuse is never justified, I hope that's clear for everybody. > Two wrongs don't make a right. > > So we are down to the definition of verbal abuse. > The Oxford dictionary gives me: > > "speak to (someone) in an insulting and offensive way" Here's another definition from Merriam Webster: * language that condemns or vilifies usually unjustly, intemperately, and angrily That definition fits my idea of abuse. Linus was not unjust, so it's not abuse. > For example I think that calling somebody a moron qualifies. I don't, specially if the person is indeed being a moron. >> > I think it's pretty clear that one doesn't need to be verbally abusive >> > in order to stop bad code from getting into the kernel. >> >> You can think whatever you want, others have already shown that >> changing the tone of the message in the examples would have changed >> the desired effect. > > I disagree and it is certainly not the case in my experience. Suit yourself. If want you wanted was to voice your opinion, I think you have already done that. -- Felipe Contreras ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 17:56 ` Stefano Stabellini 2013-07-17 18:05 ` Felipe Contreras @ 2013-07-17 18:42 ` Al Viro 2013-07-17 22:24 ` Sarah Sharp 1 sibling, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Al Viro @ 2013-07-17 18:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Stefano Stabellini Cc: Felipe Contreras, Steven Rostedt, Sarah Sharp, CAI Qian, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 06:56:16PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > Abuse is never justified, I hope that's clear for everybody. Depends on details of your definition of abuse. > So we are down to the definition of verbal abuse. > The Oxford dictionary gives me: > > "speak to (someone) in an insulting and offensive way" Insufficient details to tell if the statement above is correct. Insulting and offensive to *whom*? I have seen people making completely revolting statements about e.g. females in general and get extremely insulted when said statements had been described as sexist, no matter how neutral had description been. I have seen people deeply insulted by being told (in absolutely neutral expressions) that recipe they had offered for some task will not do what they said it would, when the simple experiment (reproduced by a lot of people present) would have clearly demonstrated just that. The same people tend to get _really_ insulted when somebody reports the result of said experiment. And anybody who'd been on the net for a year (hell, a month would suffice) can bring a lot more interesting cases... BTW, is it an abuse to describe somebody as a demagogue? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 18:42 ` Al Viro @ 2013-07-17 22:24 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-18 0:29 ` Felipe Contreras 2013-07-18 4:59 ` Al Viro 0 siblings, 2 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-17 22:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Al Viro Cc: Stefano Stabellini, Felipe Contreras, Steven Rostedt, CAI Qian, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 07:42:44PM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 06:56:16PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > > Abuse is never justified, I hope that's clear for everybody. > > Depends on details of your definition of abuse. > > > So we are down to the definition of verbal abuse. > > The Oxford dictionary gives me: > > > > "speak to (someone) in an insulting and offensive way" > > Insufficient details to tell if the statement above is correct. > Insulting and offensive to *whom*? It's not helpful to look at a dictionary definition of verbal abuse, because it's much too short. Here's a much longer description of verbally abusive behaviors: http://outofthefog.net/CommonBehaviors/VerbalAbuse.html Key ones that apply to LKML communications: belittlement, demeaning statements, hysteria, name-calling, raging and violent statements, and mocking sarcasm. Sarah Sharp ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 22:24 ` Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-18 0:29 ` Felipe Contreras 2013-07-18 4:59 ` Al Viro 1 sibling, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Felipe Contreras @ 2013-07-18 0:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: Al Viro, Stefano Stabellini, Steven Rostedt, CAI Qian, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 5:24 PM, Sarah Sharp <sarah.a.sharp@linux.intel.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 07:42:44PM +0100, Al Viro wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 06:56:16PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >> >> > Abuse is never justified, I hope that's clear for everybody. >> >> Depends on details of your definition of abuse. >> >> > So we are down to the definition of verbal abuse. >> > The Oxford dictionary gives me: >> > >> > "speak to (someone) in an insulting and offensive way" >> >> Insufficient details to tell if the statement above is correct. >> Insulting and offensive to *whom*? > > It's not helpful to look at a dictionary definition of verbal abuse, > because it's much too short. > > Here's a much longer description of verbally abusive behaviors: > > http://outofthefog.net/CommonBehaviors/VerbalAbuse.html That definition starts with this: "Any kind of repeated pattern of inappropriate, derogatory or threatening speech directed at one individual by another." The key word being *REPEATED*. I don't see Linus *repeatedly* insulting Mauro (or any other developer), under that definition, it's not verbal abuse. I don't like that definition, but even in that one your claim doesn't stand. -- Felipe Contreras ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 22:24 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-18 0:29 ` Felipe Contreras @ 2013-07-18 4:59 ` Al Viro 1 sibling, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Al Viro @ 2013-07-18 4:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: Stefano Stabellini, Felipe Contreras, Steven Rostedt, CAI Qian, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 03:24:18PM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > > Abuse is never justified, I hope that's clear for everybody. > > > > Depends on details of your definition of abuse. [snip] > http://outofthefog.net/CommonBehaviors/VerbalAbuse.html " "Always" and "Never" Statements - "Always" and "Never" Statements are declarations containing the words "always" or "never". They are commonly used but rarely true. " See above... And as far as I can see in this thread, there *is* a pattern of that by Stefano; should that be interpreted as verbal abuse? > Key ones that apply to LKML communications: belittlement, demeaning > statements, hysteria, name-calling, raging and violent statements, and > mocking sarcasm. " Targeted Humor, Mocking and Sarcasm - Targeted Humor is any sustained pattern of joking, sarcasm or mockery which is designed to reduce another individual's reputation in their own eyes or in the eyes of others. " s/individual's reputation/appeal of a bad idea being proposed/ and you'll get something that is not only justified, but highly valuable. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 17:00 ` Stefano Stabellini 2013-07-17 17:15 ` Felipe Contreras @ 2013-07-17 17:28 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-17 19:02 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-17 17:57 ` Al Viro 2 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-17 17:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Stefano Stabellini Cc: Sarah Sharp, CAI Qian, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 18:00 +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > On Wed, 17 Jul 2013, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > The last thing I want to do is to lower the quality of the kernel just > > to get a wider range of developers. > > Can we stop bringing the quality of the code into the discussion? > > I think it's pretty clear that one doesn't need to be verbally abusive > in order to stop bad code from getting into the kernel. Matters what you definition of verbally abusive is. Can I say "your code is crap!"? I've done that before, and the person I said it to asked me to explain why it was crap, and I went into detail to why I called it crap and still think it was crap. But I'm not even one to insult people, as that's not my personality. Well, maybe I've called people "idiot" before. But that usually comes with someone sticking to an idea when all evidence proves otherwise. Although I'm one of the tame ones on LKML, I still want to reserve my right to be able to call someone an idiot, if someone is making stupid ideas and constantly ignores facts that are being presented to them. Anyway, as I've said several times. Is there a problem here? Besides the few outbursts from Linus, is there other examples on LKML within the last year where it is an abusive environment? From what I see, it is becoming more mellow, and people have been making efforts to listen to each other. The trend on LKML is going in the right direction, so I'm a bit curious to why we need to make such an issue of this. Is it just to make Linus lower his tone a bit? -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 17:28 ` Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-17 19:02 ` Sarah Sharp 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-17 19:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Stefano Stabellini, CAI Qian, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 01:28:59PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 18:00 +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > On Wed, 17 Jul 2013, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > The last thing I want to do is to lower the quality of the kernel just > > > to get a wider range of developers. > > > > Can we stop bringing the quality of the code into the discussion? > > > > I think it's pretty clear that one doesn't need to be verbally abusive > > in order to stop bad code from getting into the kernel. > > Matters what you definition of verbally abusive is. Can I say "your code > is crap!"? I've done that before, and the person I said it to asked me > to explain why it was crap, and I went into detail to why I called it > crap and still think it was crap. > > But I'm not even one to insult people, as that's not my personality. > Well, maybe I've called people "idiot" before. But that usually comes > with someone sticking to an idea when all evidence proves otherwise. I've said it before, but I'll say it again. I'm fine with calling _code_ crap (or other forms of poop). I'm fine with someone saying, "Fix this fuck up, RIGHT NOW!" I'm not fine with someone personally attacking a developer and telling them to "SHUT THE FUCK UP!" > Although I'm one of the tame ones on LKML, I still want to reserve my > right to be able to call someone an idiot, if someone is making stupid > ideas and constantly ignores facts that are being presented to them. If they ignore facts from two emails, fine, call them an idiot and drive them off with flames of fire and verbal abuse. But we all need to take the time to explain the facts, politely, without cussing or personal attacks, in the first email to the developer. > Anyway, as I've said several times. Is there a problem here? Besides the > few outbursts from Linus, is there other examples on LKML within the > last year where it is an abusive environment? You really want me to dig up more shit from other developers? I think that's an exercise probably best left to a private discussion at KS. > From what I see, it is > becoming more mellow, and people have been making efforts to listen to > each other. The trend on LKML is going in the right direction, so I'm a > bit curious to why we need to make such an issue of this. Is it just to > make Linus lower his tone a bit? Again, I'll re-emphasize this. I'm not "demanding" that Linus or anyone in this community change their personal style of communication. I'm simply providing incentive for them to change, and asking that they consider changing. I'm asking to have an open discussion about this at KS, away from the public court of opinion. I cannot "manage" personal change. I cannot "force" people to have the will to change. I can only ask politely, and advocate for change. Please don't equate advocating for change with demanding change. Sarah Sharp ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 17:00 ` Stefano Stabellini 2013-07-17 17:15 ` Felipe Contreras 2013-07-17 17:28 ` Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-17 17:57 ` Al Viro 2 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Al Viro @ 2013-07-17 17:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Stefano Stabellini Cc: Steven Rostedt, Sarah Sharp, CAI Qian, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 06:00:46PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > On Wed, 17 Jul 2013, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > The last thing I want to do is to lower the quality of the kernel just > > to get a wider range of developers. > > Can we stop bringing the quality of the code into the discussion? No. > I think it's pretty clear that one doesn't need to be verbally abusive > in order to stop bad code from getting into the kernel. At the risk of sounding pedantic... The above is true *and* irrelevant as stated, and any attempts to read it in less irrelevant way result in statements that are absolutely non-obvious and very likely false. * some amount of bad code will be getting into the kernel, in any scenario short of complete cessation of development * there certainly are ways to prevent any given bad code from getting into the kernel, once you have identified it. Even leaving aside completely ridiculous ones ("after WW3 nobody will push that into the tree", etc.), one can always watch all trees for specific code and refuse to pull if it has slipped in. * "once you have identified it" part of the above is essential and does not scale. In other words, it's not "can we stop it from happening", it's "how much will be slippling in with given setup". And _this_ is where your position becomes completely unfounded. It's not at all clear that vague alternatives being proposed will *not* result in more crap getting in. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 15:09 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-17 17:00 ` Stefano Stabellini @ 2013-07-17 17:52 ` Willy Tarreau 2013-07-17 18:51 ` Sarah Sharp 2 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Willy Tarreau @ 2013-07-17 17:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Sarah Sharp, CAI Qian, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 11:09:31AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > What we need are mentors, and educate people that Linux really isn't > that harsh, and that the new developers actually do have talent, and > shouldn't be afraid to post their code. Hey, this is exactly the goal that we seek at the Kernel Recipes conference in France [1] whose second edition happens in September this year, and we're still looking for a few speakers. If some developers want to explain how they were mentored or how they mentored others, they're welcome! Please contact me off-list. Willy [1] https://kernel-recipes.org/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 15:09 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-17 17:00 ` Stefano Stabellini 2013-07-17 17:52 ` Willy Tarreau @ 2013-07-17 18:51 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-17 19:04 ` David Lang ` (5 more replies) 2 siblings, 6 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-17 18:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: CAI Qian, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 11:09:31AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 07:48 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > > > Does that sound like there are not going to have enough direct/thick skin > > > new kernel developers around to maintain the future Linux community? Maybe > > > just need a better pipeline for people comfortable for this culture? > > > > No, we don't need a better pipeline for people who can "put up with > > shit". We need a better pipeline for people who can work together > > civilly, and still get shit done. > > > > I'm working on getting a pipeline of women into kernel development, > > through the FOSS Outreach Program for Women. They slowly get introduced > > to Linux development culture, starting with a very friendly separate > > mailing list and IRC channel, and finally moving to work with a kernel > > mentor on a bigger project on the main Linux kernel development lists. > > We have seven women participating this round, and I suspect we'll have > > even more the next round. > > > > So deal with it. You're going to have a lot more women in the kernel > > community, and not all of them will be willing to put up with verbal > > abuse. If you want to attract top talent that also happen to be women > > or racial minorities, the verbal abuse needs to stop. > > > > I have to ask. How much verbal abuse have you received in LKML? And I > don't mean in this thread. I assume you also want me to exclude the verbal abuse and personal threats I've received via email and my blog because of this thread. But, just for reference, I'll post them here as well. Here's a gem from a senior software developer at Nvidia: https://picasaweb.google.com/116960357493251979546/Trolls#5901298464591248626 And another email from a software developer in Portland, where I live: https://picasaweb.google.com/116960357493251979546/Trolls#5901288095984358098 On my blog, here's some choice comments, mostly asking me to quit kernel development, along with more than a few misogynist comments: "You volunteered to help out on the Linux journey. He never volunteered to care for your feelings, nor did anyone else. It’s an opt-in community and you can always opt out at any time. Caveat emptor." "You’re no one compared to Linus. Start being Alan Cox or Theodore T’so first to criticize him for his behaviour." "Drama Queen" "The LKML is not a place for easily offended girls to be. Get over yourself." "shit, just what we need – a bitch running around crying about how hurt her feelings are." "Oy vey you poor goyi…girl. You need to teach these sexist boys that being racist is wrong. Think of the wonderful things that womyn have done in the IT field. Clearly Linus is a rape apologist who fosters negative views of minorities." "This is why women are viewed as pathetic jokes, especially in the tech world – because you’re weak and ineffectual, insufferable pansies who expect the world to cater and accommodate your thin skin and easily offended hyper-sensibilities. Grow the fuck up bitch. It’s real cute how you’ve tried to paint yourself as some gallant Joan of Arc, crusading against “muh bigotry” and “muh intolerance.” You’re a feminist joke, one in a very long line." Speaking out about this has made the crazies come out of the woodwork. It means I now have to book a rental car so I don't have to be on public transit, and book a hotel room so I don't have to be home. Those crazies, especially the local Portland SW developer, can easily find my home address from my blog domain name whois info. Being a woman in open source, and speaking out, means I put my personal safety in jeopardy. I should not have to put up with this. We should be able to have a private conversation at KS without the court of public opinion getting involved. However, that's not the way it went, and now I have to deal with the verbal abuse, sexist statements, and threats that are the backlash from this thread. > You pointed out a few examples of Linus, and it usually comes from > someone that should know better being told not to do something, and they > continue to do it, and then finally Linus blows up. Linus doesn't start > his cursing at the first email. It takes a few to show that you deserve > a blow up. > > Usually sensitive developers would listen the first time they are told. > It's more of the thick skin developers that push the envelope. But I > understand, its the "image" that bothers you. No, it's actually some of the comments I've received that bother me. For example, I would never want to deal with the misogynist troll, Lubin, EVER again. http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.usb.general/42482 "You may be seen as a liability by Intel preaching "feminism" on a public forum. From their point of view: will you play the gender card on them. Here is what you did: Instead of realizing that I was being _very_ sympathetic to a more diverse Linux development environment by using the phrase "the old boys club", you pretended to take offense, not realizing you're in fact becoming a liability. That's okay. Honest mistake." Telling me my job at Intel is in jeopardy because I'm complaining about sexist statements is a threat. It's verbal abuse, and I won't take it. I shouldn't have to put up with these kinds of statements and personal attacks. > The scariest thing about Linux kernel development is that because its so > successful, and the development is so open to the world (you are > programming on a stage in a world theater), that thin skin people may > not be comfortable in that environment. What we need are mentors, and > educate people that Linux really isn't that harsh, and that the new > developers actually do have talent, and shouldn't be afraid to post > their code. We do need mentors. Thank you for signing up to be one. I disagree that we should educate people that Linux really isn't that harsh. We are technically harsh, and always will be. Linux kernel developers require perfect code, and perfectly formatted patches. Setting up mentees to think otherwise is simply not advisable. However, we can assure them that they won't see harsh _personal_ attacks, and coach them through dealing with their first harsh attacks against their _code_. > The last thing I want to do is to lower the quality of the kernel just > to get a wider range of developers. I agree. We shouldn't lower our coding standards. We should however, take a very close look at our personal communication styles, in order to ensure we aren't excluding a wide range of developers. Sarah Sharp ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 18:51 ` Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-17 19:04 ` David Lang 2013-07-17 19:29 ` Steven Rostedt ` (4 subsequent siblings) 5 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: David Lang @ 2013-07-17 19:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: Steven Rostedt, CAI Qian, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, 17 Jul 2013, Sarah Sharp wrote: > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 11:09:31AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: >> On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 07:48 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: >> >>>> Does that sound like there are not going to have enough direct/thick skin >>>> new kernel developers around to maintain the future Linux community? Maybe >>>> just need a better pipeline for people comfortable for this culture? >>> >>> No, we don't need a better pipeline for people who can "put up with >>> shit". We need a better pipeline for people who can work together >>> civilly, and still get shit done. >>> >>> I'm working on getting a pipeline of women into kernel development, >>> through the FOSS Outreach Program for Women. They slowly get introduced >>> to Linux development culture, starting with a very friendly separate >>> mailing list and IRC channel, and finally moving to work with a kernel >>> mentor on a bigger project on the main Linux kernel development lists. >>> We have seven women participating this round, and I suspect we'll have >>> even more the next round. >>> >>> So deal with it. You're going to have a lot more women in the kernel >>> community, and not all of them will be willing to put up with verbal >>> abuse. If you want to attract top talent that also happen to be women >>> or racial minorities, the verbal abuse needs to stop. >>> >> >> I have to ask. How much verbal abuse have you received in LKML? And I >> don't mean in this thread. > > I assume you also want me to exclude the verbal abuse and personal > threats I've received via email and my blog because of this thread. > But, just for reference, I'll post them here as well. Not that I am in any way defending these posts, but does the behavior of outsiders like this in other forums really reflect the LKML attitude? Or does it reflect the fact that there are a lot of people out there who you really do not want to deal with (no matter what the topic) Just about any topic that you take a firm stand on (anything other than pure status-quo), and your stand gets out to as many people as have heard about this thread, is going to generate a LOT of offensive and irrational hate messages. Linus talked about the ongoing abuse he receives earlier in the thread, so it's not just people attacking you. David Lang ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 18:51 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-17 19:04 ` David Lang @ 2013-07-17 19:29 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-17 20:18 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2013-07-19 10:54 ` Ingo Molnar 2013-07-17 19:40 ` Willy Tarreau ` (3 subsequent siblings) 5 siblings, 2 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-17 19:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: CAI Qian, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 11:51 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > I have to ask. How much verbal abuse have you received in LKML? And I > > don't mean in this thread. > > I assume you also want me to exclude the verbal abuse and personal > threats I've received via email and my blog because of this thread. > But, just for reference, I'll post them here as well. That's the nastiness of the Internet, a different topic than LKML development. And I don't consider this thread really a LKML thread, as it's about social behavior and nothing about the Linux kernel itself. > > Here's a gem from a senior software developer at Nvidia: > https://picasaweb.google.com/116960357493251979546/Trolls#5901298464591248626 > > And another email from a software developer in Portland, where I live: > https://picasaweb.google.com/116960357493251979546/Trolls#5901288095984358098 Both are cowardly trolls that didn't post publicly. > > On my blog, here's some choice comments, mostly asking me to quit kernel > development, along with more than a few misogynist comments: > > "You volunteered to help out on the Linux journey. He never volunteered > to care for your feelings, nor did anyone else. It’s an opt-in community > and you can always opt out at any time. Caveat emptor." > > "You’re no one compared to Linus. Start being Alan Cox or Theodore T’so > first to criticize him for his behaviour." > > "Drama Queen" > > "The LKML is not a place for easily offended girls to be. Get over > yourself." > > "shit, just what we need – a bitch running around crying about how hurt > her feelings are." > > "Oy vey you poor goyi…girl. You need to teach these sexist boys that > being racist is wrong. Think of the wonderful things that womyn have > done in the IT field. Clearly Linus is a rape apologist who fosters > negative views of minorities." > > "This is why women are viewed as pathetic jokes, especially in the tech > world – because you’re weak and ineffectual, insufferable pansies who > expect the world to cater and accommodate your thin skin and easily > offended hyper-sensibilities. Grow the fuck up bitch. It’s real cute how > you’ve tried to paint yourself as some gallant Joan of Arc, crusading > against “muh bigotry” and “muh intolerance.” You’re a feminist joke, one > in a very long line." Again, this is the Internet social media, which is not an environment for productivity, but a cesspool of filth. Off topic to what I asked. > > > Speaking out about this has made the crazies come out of the woodwork. And what did you expect? The Internet if filled with assholes. > It means I now have to book a rental car so I don't have to be on public > transit, and book a hotel room so I don't have to be home. Those > crazies, especially the local Portland SW developer, can easily find my > home address from my blog domain name whois info. > > Being a woman in open source, and speaking out, means I put my personal > safety in jeopardy. I should not have to put up with this. We should > be able to have a private conversation at KS without the court of public > opinion getting involved. However, that's not the way it went, and now > I have to deal with the verbal abuse, sexist statements, and threats > that are the backlash from this thread. This is a real issue, but not one that LKML can solve, nor Linus being nicer will have any affect on it. It is the social media and the trolls that live within it. Women, in particular, that fight for social change, bring out the worse of the Internet dung bugs and they cowardly will attack you behind anonymous accounts or private email. You came out swinging at Linus when he mentioned to Greg that he needs to yell at people more. You did that on a public list. I was actually very impressed by your bravery in doing so because I knew (and expected that you knew too) that this will stir up the feces that exists under the Internet shoe. The Internet is a dangerous tool. Like I really think Linus quietly regrets saying "SHUT THE FUCK UP", it was done publicly and you and others have been using it against him. By attacking Linus publicly, will bring out the low life that will attack you. Is that right? No, but it's a reality that you know far too well. But you didn't yell at Linus because you get trolls on your blog and private emails. You yelled at him because you were upset at the way he yells at others thinking that this will keep good people from joining our community. This may be the case, but I asked you, do you get yelled at by kernel developers for your work? And again, not about this thread, because this thread is not technical and has nothing directly to do with Linux. > > > You pointed out a few examples of Linus, and it usually comes from > > someone that should know better being told not to do something, and they > > continue to do it, and then finally Linus blows up. Linus doesn't start > > his cursing at the first email. It takes a few to show that you deserve > > a blow up. > > > > Usually sensitive developers would listen the first time they are told. > > It's more of the thick skin developers that push the envelope. But I > > understand, its the "image" that bothers you. > > No, it's actually some of the comments I've received that bother me. > For example, I would never want to deal with the misogynist troll, > Lubin, EVER again. > > http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.usb.general/42482 > > "You may be seen as a liability by Intel preaching "feminism" on a > public forum. From their point of view: will you play the gender card > on them. Here is what you did: Instead of realizing that I was being > _very_ sympathetic to a more diverse Linux development environment by > using the phrase "the old boys club", you pretended to take offense, not > realizing you're in fact becoming a liability. That's okay. Honest > mistake." > > Telling me my job at Intel is in jeopardy because I'm complaining about > sexist statements is a threat. It's verbal abuse, and I won't take it. > I shouldn't have to put up with these kinds of statements and personal > attacks. He gave you his personal opinion. He gave you his opinion that your job may be in jeopardy. Is he your manager? Does he work or represent Intel? If not, ignore him. I don't see that as verbal abuse. Tell him "who are you to decide my job?". > > > The scariest thing about Linux kernel development is that because its so > > successful, and the development is so open to the world (you are > > programming on a stage in a world theater), that thin skin people may > > not be comfortable in that environment. What we need are mentors, and > > educate people that Linux really isn't that harsh, and that the new > > developers actually do have talent, and shouldn't be afraid to post > > their code. > > We do need mentors. Thank you for signing up to be one. > > I disagree that we should educate people that Linux really isn't that > harsh. We are technically harsh, and always will be. Linux kernel > developers require perfect code, and perfectly formatted patches. I agree. > Setting up mentees to think otherwise is simply not advisable. However, > we can assure them that they won't see harsh _personal_ attacks, and > coach them through dealing with their first harsh attacks against their > _code_. That's what I meant. Sorry it was misunderstood. Yeah, it may be harsh in the fact that we expect high quality code to get into the kernel, but I meant, the harshness isn't personal unless you try to make it that way. > > > The last thing I want to do is to lower the quality of the kernel just > > to get a wider range of developers. > > I agree. We shouldn't lower our coding standards. We should however, > take a very close look at our personal communication styles, in order to > ensure we aren't excluding a wide range of developers. I've said it several times in this thread. I think the tone of LKML has been getting more tame, and it's not your father's mailing list anymore. ;-) -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 19:29 ` Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-17 20:18 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2013-07-19 10:54 ` Ingo Molnar 1 sibling, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Geert Uytterhoeven @ 2013-07-17 20:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Sarah Sharp, CAI Qian, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 9:29 PM, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > I've said it several times in this thread. I think the tone of LKML has > been getting more tame, and it's not your father's mailing list > anymore. ;-) Indeed. Several (definitely more than 5) years ago, there was a presentation (IIRC even a keynote) at OLS about the hostility of lkml to newcomers. Bad and good examples were shown. Several attendees couldn't believe who wrote one of the good examples, as its author was used to be known for his very harsh emails several years before ;-) And in the mean time, things have improved even more! Side note: lots of this use of words is cultural. When I first visited the USA, I was surprised to never hear anyone use four letter words, unlike in movies exported from the USA. While these English words had become common in Europe (at least in Belgium)... Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 19:29 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-17 20:18 ` Geert Uytterhoeven @ 2013-07-19 10:54 ` Ingo Molnar 1 sibling, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Ingo Molnar @ 2013-07-19 10:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Sarah Sharp, CAI Qian, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, Linus Torvalds * Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 11:51 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > > > I have to ask. How much verbal abuse have you received in LKML? And I > > > don't mean in this thread. > > > > I assume you also want me to exclude the verbal abuse and personal > > threats I've received via email and my blog because of this thread. > > But, just for reference, I'll post them here as well. > > That's the nastiness of the Internet, a different topic than LKML > development. And I don't consider this thread really a LKML thread, as > it's about social behavior and nothing about the Linux kernel itself. > > > > > Here's a gem from a senior software developer at Nvidia: > > https://picasaweb.google.com/116960357493251979546/Trolls#5901298464591248626 > > > > And another email from a software developer in Portland, where I live: > > https://picasaweb.google.com/116960357493251979546/Trolls#5901288095984358098 > > Both are cowardly trolls that didn't post publicly. > > > > > On my blog, here's some choice comments, mostly asking me to quit kernel > > development, along with more than a few misogynist comments: > > > > "You volunteered to help out on the Linux journey. He never volunteered > > to care for your feelings, nor did anyone else. It???s an opt-in community > > and you can always opt out at any time. Caveat emptor." > > > > "You???re no one compared to Linus. Start being Alan Cox or Theodore T???so > > first to criticize him for his behaviour." > > > > "Drama Queen" > > > > "The LKML is not a place for easily offended girls to be. Get over > > yourself." > > > > "shit, just what we need ??? a bitch running around crying about how hurt > > her feelings are." > > > > "Oy vey you poor goyi???girl. You need to teach these sexist boys that > > being racist is wrong. Think of the wonderful things that womyn have > > done in the IT field. Clearly Linus is a rape apologist who fosters > > negative views of minorities." > > > > "This is why women are viewed as pathetic jokes, especially in the tech > > world ??? because you???re weak and ineffectual, insufferable pansies who > > expect the world to cater and accommodate your thin skin and easily > > offended hyper-sensibilities. Grow the fuck up bitch. It???s real cute how > > you???ve tried to paint yourself as some gallant Joan of Arc, crusading > > against ???muh bigotry??? and ???muh intolerance.??? You???re a feminist joke, one > > in a very long line." > > Again, this is the Internet social media, which is not an environment > for productivity, but a cesspool of filth. Off topic to what I asked. > > > Speaking out about this has made the crazies come out of the woodwork. > > And what did you expect? The Internet if filled with assholes. It's worse than that: being an asshole appears to also be correlated with the likelihood of speaking up on forums! So assholes are overrepresented, especially on forums that are semi-anonymous. Sarah, you should see some of the hateful comments I got over past scheduler maintenance decisions... [Or rather, you should not.] When being involved in polarizing discussions, especially if you yourself frame it as polarizing, you should expect to receive a wide spectrum of opinion and outright trolling. The hateful, despicable, abhorrent trolling you cited should not be projected over to your opponent in the discussion, unless your opponent voices it as well ... Thanks, Ingo ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 18:51 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-17 19:04 ` David Lang 2013-07-17 19:29 ` Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-17 19:40 ` Willy Tarreau 2013-07-17 22:38 ` David Woodhouse ` (2 subsequent siblings) 5 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Willy Tarreau @ 2013-07-17 19:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: Steven Rostedt, CAI Qian, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 11:51:38AM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > I assume you also want me to exclude the verbal abuse and personal > threats I've received via email and my blog because of this thread. > But, just for reference, I'll post them here as well. [ comments removed not to give them too much publicity ] (...) Sadly now you see that your friends are here on LKML and that some outsiders are much much worse. You'd probably prefer being criticized by Linus for your design choices than having to ever work with one of the stupid donkeys that wrote the excerpts you published. (...) > Speaking out about this has made the crazies come out of the woodwork. It always happens on public discussions unfortunately. It's the only way they find to feel like they exist. (BTW calling them crazies is an attack to their person and may be contrary to what you'd like to see on this ML, no ?). > It means I now have to book a rental car so I don't have to be on public > transit, and book a hotel room so I don't have to be home. Those > crazies, especially the local Portland SW developer, can easily find my > home address from my blog domain name whois info. There is no reason to fear the stupid who use public places to threaten. It's their moment of glory. After that they go to the toilets and have a 5-to-1 session and they relax. > Being a woman in open source, and speaking out, means I put my personal > safety in jeopardy. I should not have to put up with this. We should > be able to have a private conversation at KS without the court of public > opinion getting involved. However, that's not the way it went, and now > I have to deal with the verbal abuse, sexist statements, and threats > that are the backlash from this thread. That's the risk of launching very sensitive subjects on mailing lists. I don't know if you remembers the era of the trolls, we had almost once a month 7-8 years ago, it was hard to get rid of them. They just started non-tech subjects that always derived into flame wars. Here you started a subject of real concern that merits being discussed about, but which relates more to emotion and culture, and derives the same way. > > Usually sensitive developers would listen the first time they are told. > > It's more of the thick skin developers that push the envelope. But I > > understand, its the "image" that bothers you. > > No, it's actually some of the comments I've received that bother me. > For example, I would never want to deal with the misogynist troll, > Lubin, EVER again. (...) > Telling me my job at Intel is in jeopardy because I'm complaining about > sexist statements is a threat. I was about to comment on the fact that you're 3 from intel who'd better use your private addresses to avoid the image of "intel vs Linus" that some may get but since all your comments have been clean and argumented, there is no reason for anyone sane to consider them inappropriate. Intel would be foolish to fire you when you tried to raise the professional look of the Linux community even if many (including me) disagree. > It's verbal abuse, and I won't take it. > I shouldn't have to put up with these kinds of statements and personal > attacks. Too late, it's done, you must have no regrets and stay firmly in your shoes (and listen to sane people's arguments). > I disagree that we should educate people that Linux really isn't that > harsh. We are technically harsh, and always will be. Linux kernel > developers require perfect code, and perfectly formatted patches. > Setting up mentees to think otherwise is simply not advisable. I disagree. Precisely what the newcomers need is to find their way through the forest of maintainers, reviewers, etc... You can send patches in whatever format, someone will always tell you how to fix this. You'll at least get one nice person taking the time to explain to you. We all experienced this. What needs to be taught to newcomers is how the process works, to ignore the few irrespectful people who will immediately comment on their indentation with harsh words and better wait for the more teaching comments that come later, to take care of every such comments, ask when they don't understand, and repost. The questions I've got from newcomers were along "Have you ever got an e-mail from Linus ? Wow... Have you ever met him ? No ? Strange, are there many people who don't meet ?" etc... They're completely lost because for them this project is almost sci-fi. I try to make them understand that my contribution is very small and non-important and that I'm as dumb as they are so there is no reason they can't participate. Once they can accept that, most of the job is done. The remaining part is to ensure they're not discouraged by the formalities about merge windows, subsystems, -rc, etc. > However, > we can assure them that they won't see harsh _personal_ attacks, and > coach them through dealing with their first harsh attacks against their > _code_. No I prefer to tell them that with I don't know how many thousands of subscribers, they *will* get some personal attacks that they can simply ignore just like when they cross a drunk man on the street shouting words at bystanders. Best regards, Willy ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 18:51 ` Sarah Sharp ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2013-07-17 19:40 ` Willy Tarreau @ 2013-07-17 22:38 ` David Woodhouse 2013-07-17 23:05 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra 2013-07-18 2:40 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt 5 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: David Woodhouse @ 2013-07-17 22:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: Steven Rostedt, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, CAI Qian, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Ingo Molnar, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linus Torvalds, Willy Tarreau [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4510 bytes --] On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 11:51 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > No, it's actually some of the comments I've received that bother me. > For example, I would never want to deal with the misogynist troll, > Lubin, EVER again. It surprises me to see you calling someone names like that, Sarah. It seems to be contrary to the request that you are making of others. > http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.usb.general/42482 Perhaps I'm missing some context, but I'm a little confused. Did you really complain at him *merely* because he used the phrase 'old boys club'? That phrase is *not* about the gender of the participants, it's about nepotism and exclusion of non-members. Men are just as excluded by the "old boys network" of that phrase, as women are. He's talking about *himself* being excluded, as far as I can tell. At least in places. To complain that he was being sexist, just because he used that phrase, was just *WRONG*. That was *absolutely* not what he was talking about. You appeared to bring gender (and gender discrimination) into a conversation where it was completely out of place and inappropriate to do so. Sarah, it may have escaped your attention that some words and phrases which are common in the English language contain words which appear to be gender-specific. But that *doesn't* make them sexist. It makes no more sense to harangue this person for his use of the phrase 'old boys club', than it would to harangue someone for saying 'mankind' instead of 'peoplekind'. > "You may be seen as a liability by Intel preaching "feminism" on a > public forum. From their point of view: will you play the gender card > on them. Here is what you did: Instead of realizing that I was being > _very_ sympathetic to a more diverse Linux development environment by > using the phrase "the old boys club", you pretended to take offense, not > realizing you're in fact becoming a liability. That's okay. Honest > mistake." > > Telling me my job at Intel is in jeopardy because I'm complaining about > sexist statements is a threat. It's verbal abuse, and I won't take it. > I shouldn't have to put up with these kinds of statements and personal > attacks. It's not verbal abuse, and it's not an attack. He's suggesting that if you jump at shadows and make inappropriate complaints, you may make your employer wary because they might be concerned that you may do the same thing to *their* detriment. Knowing your employer as I do, I think he's probably wrong — but I certainly don't think it was a personal attack. Unless that message came from someone inside your employer (and probably in your management chain), it's hard to interpret it as a 'threat'. It's just misplaced, misguided, "personal advice" being offered to make a point. You gave plenty of examples earlier of stuff which *was* completely inappropriate and personal abuse. This isn't one of them, and it detracts from your position. Sarah, if you're going to ask us to change our behaviour to accommodate those who are unable to cope with our normal day-to-day communication, then I think you need to be careful to retain your credibility by practising what you preach, and by making sure that there *is* merit in anything you do complain about. There *is* plenty to complain about, certainly, without also jumping at shadows and effectively performing an ad hominem on yourself by doing so. When you say that you want us to avoid personal abuse and attacks, that's fine and I think everyone can fairly much agree. But it looks like you have a very different definition of what 'abuse' and 'attacks' actually are, too. I think that's largely where the understanding breaks down in this discussion. I support efforts to ensure civility and encourage a more diverse participation in our community. But when I see examples like this one, I worry about what it might lead to. I fear that it might end up being taken *too* far, and that makes me reluctant to support it — I fear that we'll end up on a slippery slope to a world where I'll end up being excluded because someone will take offence at me simply using the common phrases and idioms of the language I grew up with. And the offence which is drawn will be *so* random and arbitrary and unpredictable, like the alleged 'sexism' in 'old boys club' above, that I'll be fearful of saying *anything*, ever. I don't think I'm the only one who has that reaction. -- dwmw2 [-- Attachment #2: smime.p7s --] [-- Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature, Size: 5745 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 18:51 ` Sarah Sharp ` (3 preceding siblings ...) 2013-07-17 22:38 ` David Woodhouse @ 2013-07-17 23:05 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra 2013-07-18 2:40 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt 5 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Ramkumar Ramachandra @ 2013-07-17 23:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: Steven Rostedt, CAI Qian, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar Sarah Sharp wrote: > https://picasaweb.google.com/116960357493251979546/Trolls#5901298464591248626 > https://picasaweb.google.com/116960357493251979546/Trolls#5901288095984358098 > > On my blog, here's some choice comments, mostly asking me to quit kernel > development, along with more than a few misogynist comments: So it's a publicity stunt then. That is the only rational explanation, because the alternative explanation is that you're trying to tame the internet ;) Another flash in the pan: this whole event (and you) will be erased from everyone's memories in a few weeks. Okay, maybe a few months if you get fired from SendGrid. You're better than that. Think calmly, and focus your attention on making a long-term impact. Hint: it's not going to happen by arguing endlessly about the same thing. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 18:51 ` Sarah Sharp ` (4 preceding siblings ...) 2013-07-17 23:05 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra @ 2013-07-18 2:40 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt 5 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt @ 2013-07-18 2:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: Steven Rostedt, CAI Qian, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 11:51 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > Here's a gem from a senior software developer at Nvidia: > https://picasaweb.google.com/116960357493251979546/Trolls#5901298464591248626 > > And another email from a software developer in Portland, where I live: > https://picasaweb.google.com/116960357493251979546/Trolls#5901288095984358098 > > On my blog, here's some choice comments, mostly asking me to quit kernel > development, along with more than a few misogynist comments: > > "You volunteered to help out on the Linux journey. He never volunteered > to care for your feelings, nor did anyone else. It’s an opt-in community > and you can always opt out at any time. Caveat emptor." > > "You’re no one compared to Linus. Start being Alan Cox or Theodore T’so > first to criticize him for his behaviour." There is a whole army of idiots out there, we know that. We aren't going to fix *that*. Was any of the above actually a *relevant* person as part of our community ? Because non of what we do, say, document, decide, etc... here will change those idiots. Cheers, Ben. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 14:48 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-17 15:09 ` Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-18 3:00 ` CAI Qian 1 sibling, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: CAI Qian @ 2013-07-18 3:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: Trond Myklebust, Ric Wheeler, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Ingo Molnar, Olivier Galibert, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Linus Torvalds, Willy Tarreau ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sarah Sharp" <sarah.a.sharp@linux.intel.com> > To: "CAI Qian" <caiqian@redhat.com> > Cc: "Trond Myklebust" <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>, "Ric Wheeler" <ricwheeler@gmail.com>, "David Lang" > <david@lang.hm>, ksummit-2013-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org, "Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, > "Darren Hart" <dvhart@linux.intel.com>, "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@kernel.org>, "Olivier Galibert" <galibert@pobox.com>, > "Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "stable" <stable@vger.kernel.org>, "Linus Torvalds" > <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>, "Willy Tarreau" <w@1wt.eu> > Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 10:48:49 PM > Subject: Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML > > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 03:36:36AM -0400, CAI Qian wrote: > > > On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 19:31 -0400, Ric Wheeler wrote: > > > > On 07/16/2013 07:12 PM, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 06:54:59PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > > >> On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 15:43 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > > > > In order to make our community better, we need to figure out where > > > > > the > > > > > baseline of "good" behavior is. We need to define what behavior we > > > > > want > > > > > from both maintainers and patch submitters. E.g. "No regressions" > > > > > and > > > > > "don't break userspace" and "no personal attacks". That needs to be > > > > > written down somewhere, and it isn't. If it's documented somewhere, > > > > > point me to the file in Documentation. Hint: it's not there. > > > > > > > > > > That is the problem. > > > > > > > > > > Sarah Sharp > > > > > > > > The problem you are pointing out - and it is a problem - makes us less > > > > effective > > > > as a community. > > > > > > Not really. Most of the people who already work as part of this > > > community are completely used to it. We've created the environment, and > > > have no problems with it. > > > > > > Where it could possibly be a problem is when it comes to recruiting > > > _new_ members to our community. Particularly so given that some > > > journalists take a special pleasure in reporting particularly juicy > > > comments and antics. That would tend to scare off a lot of gun-shy > > > newbies. > > > > > > On the other hand, it might tend to bias our recruitment toward people > > > of a more "special" disposition. Perhaps we finally need the services of > > > a social scientist to help us find out... > > > > Does that sound like there are not going to have enough direct/thick skin > > new kernel developers around to maintain the future Linux community? Maybe > > just need a better pipeline for people comfortable for this culture? > > No, we don't need a better pipeline for people who can "put up with > shit". We need a better pipeline for people who can work together > civilly, and still get shit done. > > I'm working on getting a pipeline of women into kernel development, > through the FOSS Outreach Program for Women. They slowly get introduced > to Linux development culture, starting with a very friendly separate > mailing list and IRC channel, and finally moving to work with a kernel > mentor on a bigger project on the main Linux kernel development lists. > We have seven women participating this round, and I suspect we'll have > even more the next round. > > So deal with it. You're going to have a lot more women in the kernel > community, and not all of them will be willing to put up with verbal > abuse. If you want to attract top talent that also happen to be women > or racial minorities, the verbal abuse needs to stop. Maybe we need something like this? http://us.battle.net/en/community/conduct > > Sarah Sharp > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) 2013-07-16 23:12 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-16 23:31 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML Ric Wheeler @ 2013-07-16 23:38 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-17 14:01 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML Paul Gortmaker 2013-07-17 0:32 ` Jeff Liu 2 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-16 23:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: Theodore Ts'o, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Ingo Molnar, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linus Torvalds, Willy Tarreau On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 16:12 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > What problem exactly are we trying to solve here? > > Personal attacks are not cool Steve. I never said it was. But no matter what we do, people *will* be offended. Can't help that. > Some people simply don't care if a > verbal tirade is directed at them. Others do not want anyone to attack > them personally, but they're fine with people attacking their code. If all you do is send code, then that's all that will happen. If you start dictating policy, then it may be directed at you. > > Bystanders that don't understand the kernel community structure are > discouraged from contributing because they don't want to be verbally > abused, and they really don't want to see either personal attacks or > intense belittling, demeaning comments about code. I wonder how true this is. I don't mean just any bystander, but people that actually have code they could submit. I'll admit that when I first started sending patches to LKML, I was terrified. Not because I was afraid of being scolded, but because I was afraid that what I sent wasn't good. It was a true judgment of my work. I was prettified. Sure, I wouldn't have liked being insulted, but as long as there was backing of why my work sucked I would be OK with it. I actually had a rather good response to my work and I hung around. But is there code existing out in the world that isn't in because people are afraid of being insulted? Or afraid of their code being insulted? I was the latter, and as we all seem to agree, the insulting of code is what we want to keep. > > In order to make our community better, we need to figure out where the > baseline of "good" behavior is. "community" has all sorts of behavior. The question is, is there really a problem here? Sure some people don't like it, but they are still here. Do you plan on leaving the Linux community if Linus doesn't change? Now that would be a shame if you did, because you are a talented developer. But I've never seen people insult you directly on LKML. I don't know about private emails, but that's not the topic here. > We need to define what behavior we want > from both maintainers and patch submitters. E.g. "No regressions" and > "don't break userspace" Yes, those do need to be documented. > and "no personal attacks". I actually disagree with this. What I would say this instead: "try to keep it technical and focus on the code. If you are upset at someone, think twice before hitting send. But if you really think this is the only way to deal with the situation, then that's your call, and you get to deal with the consequences." I don't think changing peoples behavior is going to work. It wont. You don't want to change who you are, others don't want to change who they are. Deal with it. But what we can do is just try to educate people on what policies are needed to be a maintainer and code submitter (there is documentation already on some of this), and then point it to people. If people continue to ignore those after being shown, then yes, personal attacks are then in order. > That needs to be > written down somewhere, and it isn't. If it's documented somewhere, > point me to the file in Documentation. Hint: it's not there. Well, SubmittingPatches is there, but we should have a MaintainerRules or something. > > That is the problem. We can always use better documentation. -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-16 23:38 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-17 14:01 ` Paul Gortmaker 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Paul Gortmaker @ 2013-07-17 14:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Sarah Sharp, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On 13-07-16 07:38 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 16:12 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > [...] > >> We need to define what behavior we want >> from both maintainers and patch submitters. E.g. "No regressions" and >> "don't break userspace" > > Yes, those do need to be documented. Actually, they are already documented. See "Regressions" section in the file Documentation/development-process/4.Coding Paul. -- > > >> and "no personal attacks". > > I actually disagree with this. What I would say this instead: "try to > keep it technical and focus on the code. If you are upset at someone, > think twice before hitting send. But if you really think this is the > only way to deal with the situation, then that's your call, and you get > to deal with the consequences." > > I don't think changing peoples behavior is going to work. It wont. You > don't want to change who you are, others don't want to change who they > are. Deal with it. But what we can do is just try to educate people on > what policies are needed to be a maintainer and code submitter (there is > documentation already on some of this), and then point it to people. If > people continue to ignore those after being shown, then yes, personal > attacks are then in order. > > >> That needs to be >> written down somewhere, and it isn't. If it's documented somewhere, >> point me to the file in Documentation. Hint: it's not there. > > Well, SubmittingPatches is there, but we should have a MaintainerRules > or something. > >> >> That is the problem. > > We can always use better documentation. > > -- Steve > > > _______________________________________________ > Ksummit-2013-discuss mailing list > Ksummit-2013-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ksummit-2013-discuss > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-16 23:12 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-16 23:31 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML Ric Wheeler 2013-07-16 23:38 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-17 0:32 ` Jeff Liu 2013-07-17 0:51 ` Steven Rostedt 2 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Jeff Liu @ 2013-07-17 0:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: Steven Rostedt, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On 07/17/2013 07:12 AM, Sarah Sharp wrote: > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 06:54:59PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: >> On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 15:43 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: >> >>> Yes, that's true. Some kernel developers are better at moderating their >>> comments and tone towards individuals who are "sensitive". Others >>> simply don't give a shit. So we need to figure out how to meet >>> somewhere in the middle, in order to establish a baseline of civility. >> >> I have to ask this because I'm thick, and don't really understand, >> but ... >> >> What problem exactly are we trying to solve here? > > Personal attacks are not cool Steve. Some people simply don't care if a > verbal tirade is directed at them. Others do not want anyone to attack > them personally, but they're fine with people attacking their code. +1 I accept someone attaching my code, but it's better if he/she can point me out why the code is stupid. :) > > Bystanders that don't understand the kernel community structure are > discouraged from contributing because they don't want to be verbally > abused, and they really don't want to see either personal attacks or > intense belittling, demeaning comments about code. I feel the same way. > > In order to make our community better, we need to figure out where the > baseline of "good" behavior is. We need to define what behavior we want > from both maintainers and patch submitters. E.g. "No regressions" and > "don't break userspace" and "no personal attacks". That needs to be > written down somewhere, and it isn't. If it's documented somewhere, > point me to the file in Documentation. Hint: it's not there. Another thing might deviated from the main theme, but I'd like to raise it here because I would like to see what's the proper way for that. For instance, people A posted a patch set to the mailing list at first, people B think that there are some issues in A's implementation, and he happened to play around the same stuff recently, so he submitted another patch series. Finally, people B made it. (In that period, people A kept silent, maybe because he/she was unhappy) This is a actual occurrence I once observed from a subsystem list(my apologies, I just want to talk this case rather than against somebody), it seems people A is a new comer(because I can not searched any past commits of him/her from the git log), people B is definitely a senior guy. So that's my question, is that a proper collaboration form in kernel community? Does it better if people B could give some suggestions to help A to improve the code, especially if those help would help A stepping into the kernel development -- maybe it's depend largely on one's opinion. :( Thanks, -Jeff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 0:32 ` Jeff Liu @ 2013-07-17 0:51 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-17 1:23 ` Sarah Sharp ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-17 0:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jeff Liu Cc: Sarah Sharp, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 08:32 +0800, Jeff Liu wrote: > Another thing might deviated from the main theme, but I'd like to raise it > here because I would like to see what's the proper way for that. > > For instance, people A posted a patch set to the mailing list at first, > people B think that there are some issues in A's implementation, and he > happened to play around the same stuff recently, so he submitted another > patch series. Finally, people B made it. > (In that period, people A kept silent, maybe because he/she was unhappy) > > This is a actual occurrence I once observed from a subsystem list(my > apologies, I just want to talk this case rather than against somebody), > it seems people A is a new comer(because I can not searched any past > commits of him/her from the git log), people B is definitely a senior guy. > > So that's my question, is that a proper collaboration form in kernel > community? Does it better if people B could give some suggestions to > help A to improve the code, especially if those help would help A stepping > into the kernel development -- maybe it's depend largely on one's opinion. :( This is a completely different issue from the one in this thread, but it is also a legitimate issue and honestly, a bigger one than perceived insults. Is it proper collaboration? Absolutely not. Something that I try to be sensitive to as it's something I can do as well. There's been things on my todo list, where someone would send me patches that do it. I would be thinking "darn it, I wanted to do it" and even worse, the patches that were sent wouldn't be of the way I wanted them. But I've tried to be good, and instead of just going about and implementing it myself, I would try to help the person massage the patches into what I wanted. That takes a lot of effort and discipline, and honestly, helping someone else do the work you wanted is much harder than just doing it yourself. Sometimes the maintainer just takes the easier route, and does the work themselves (because it's also more fun too). But that's really a slap in the face of the person that submitted the work in the first place. If anything hurts the community, it's this behavior. Not Linus giving someone an ass wipe. -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 0:51 ` Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-17 1:23 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-17 5:51 ` Willy Tarreau 2013-07-17 9:15 ` Jeff Liu 2 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-17 1:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Jeff Liu, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 08:51:36PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 08:32 +0800, Jeff Liu wrote: > > > Another thing might deviated from the main theme, but I'd like to raise it > > here because I would like to see what's the proper way for that. > > > > For instance, people A posted a patch set to the mailing list at first, > > people B think that there are some issues in A's implementation, and he > > happened to play around the same stuff recently, so he submitted another > > patch series. Finally, people B made it. > > (In that period, people A kept silent, maybe because he/she was unhappy) > > > > This is a actual occurrence I once observed from a subsystem list(my > > apologies, I just want to talk this case rather than against somebody), > > it seems people A is a new comer(because I can not searched any past > > commits of him/her from the git log), people B is definitely a senior guy. > > > > So that's my question, is that a proper collaboration form in kernel > > community? Does it better if people B could give some suggestions to > > help A to improve the code, especially if those help would help A stepping > > into the kernel development -- maybe it's depend largely on one's opinion. :( > > This is a completely different issue from the one in this thread, but it > is also a legitimate issue and honestly, a bigger one than perceived > insults. > > Is it proper collaboration? Absolutely not. Something that I try to be > sensitive to as it's something I can do as well. There's been things on > my todo list, where someone would send me patches that do it. I would be > thinking "darn it, I wanted to do it" and even worse, the patches that > were sent wouldn't be of the way I wanted them. But I've tried to be > good, and instead of just going about and implementing it myself, I > would try to help the person massage the patches into what I wanted. > That takes a lot of effort and discipline, and honestly, helping someone > else do the work you wanted is much harder than just doing it yourself. > > Sometimes the maintainer just takes the easier route, and does the work > themselves (because it's also more fun too). But that's really a slap in > the face of the person that submitted the work in the first place. If > anything hurts the community, it's this behavior. Not Linus giving > someone an ass wipe. /me hands Steve a box of wet-wipes. :) There's a lot of controversy over whether a senior developer re-implementing someone's patchset is bad behavior. I've seen it argued both ways. "If I don't write code, I will just become a patch-pushing, pencil-pushing maintainer." Or "I don't want to bother working with newbies, it's faster to just implement this myself." I really think it's up to the maintainer whether they want to mentor someone through a big submission, or do it themselves. I usually lean towards mentorship, but hey, not everyone has the time. One thing that might make it easier for the original submitter is making sure they get a Signed-off-by line in the patchset that the maintainer submits. At the very least, their line should be directly below the maintainer's. That way, they get credit for the idea, and possibly help improve their statistics in the Signed-off-by count for that kernel revision. I suspect people would object if I suggested the original submitter should be the first Signed-off-by line, but in some cases it may be appropriate. Sometimes I take someone's code, leave it mostly intact, and fix the bugs or add a feature that we really need before the code can land. In that case, it makes sense to give the original submitter credit before the maintainer. Sarah Sharp ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 0:51 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-17 1:23 ` Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-17 5:51 ` Willy Tarreau 2013-07-17 12:21 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-17 9:15 ` Jeff Liu 2 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Willy Tarreau @ 2013-07-17 5:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Jeff Liu, Sarah Sharp, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 08:51:36PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 08:32 +0800, Jeff Liu wrote: > > > Another thing might deviated from the main theme, but I'd like to raise it > > here because I would like to see what's the proper way for that. > > > > For instance, people A posted a patch set to the mailing list at first, > > people B think that there are some issues in A's implementation, and he > > happened to play around the same stuff recently, so he submitted another > > patch series. Finally, people B made it. > > (In that period, people A kept silent, maybe because he/she was unhappy) > > > > This is a actual occurrence I once observed from a subsystem list(my > > apologies, I just want to talk this case rather than against somebody), > > it seems people A is a new comer(because I can not searched any past > > commits of him/her from the git log), people B is definitely a senior guy. > > > > So that's my question, is that a proper collaboration form in kernel > > community? Does it better if people B could give some suggestions to > > help A to improve the code, especially if those help would help A stepping > > into the kernel development -- maybe it's depend largely on one's opinion. :( > > This is a completely different issue from the one in this thread, but it > is also a legitimate issue and honestly, a bigger one than perceived > insults. > > Is it proper collaboration? Absolutely not. Something that I try to be > sensitive to as it's something I can do as well. There's been things on > my todo list, where someone would send me patches that do it. I would be > thinking "darn it, I wanted to do it" and even worse, the patches that > were sent wouldn't be of the way I wanted them. But I've tried to be > good, and instead of just going about and implementing it myself, I > would try to help the person massage the patches into what I wanted. > That takes a lot of effort and discipline, and honestly, helping someone > else do the work you wanted is much harder than just doing it yourself. > > Sometimes the maintainer just takes the easier route, and does the work > themselves (because it's also more fun too). But that's really a slap in > the face of the person that submitted the work in the first place. If > anything hurts the community, it's this behavior. Not Linus giving > someone an ass wipe. I'm used to practice a workaround for this issue on another project. When a newcomer sends me wrong code trying to address a real issue, I first spend a little time helping him/her. If I see that the gap is too large for him/her to adapt his/her work without too much help from me, then I do the work myself, propose to him/her and once it's OK, and ask him/her to submit the work with his/her name. That way they quickly gain trust in themselves, more easily feel part of the community and get a clearer idea of what is needed. Generally patches quality significantly improves with this, in very short time, because they realize the gap is huge and that they won't get this chance often. My principle is to value the effort more than the result. If the first author spent one week digging into the code to identify an issue and came up with the wrong fix, and I can fix it in 5 minutes, he certainly deserves all the merits for the work, not me. I don't believe this is that much practiced on LKML. I know at least one developer who does this, but he's probably the exception. I more often see counter proposals just as if two authors were fighting to get their patch merged. Willy ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 5:51 ` Willy Tarreau @ 2013-07-17 12:21 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-17 12:30 ` Ricardo Ferreira 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-17 12:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Willy Tarreau Cc: Jeff Liu, Sarah Sharp, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 07:51 +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > I don't believe this is that much practiced on LKML. I know at least > one developer who does this, but he's probably the exception. I more > often see counter proposals just as if two authors were fighting to > get their patch merged. And getting cursed out on LKML is also the exception and not the rule. But it's the bad apples that seem to stand out. People say how horrible LKML is, but as mentioned in the thread, Slashdot is a much worse place to post than LKML. The difference with LKML is that you may deserve the cursing you get. -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 12:21 ` Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-17 12:30 ` Ricardo Ferreira 2013-07-17 13:03 ` Steven Rostedt 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Ricardo Ferreira @ 2013-07-17 12:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Willy Tarreau, Jeff Liu, Sarah Sharp, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar Slashdot is just a cesspool of trolls, not a good comparison. On 17 July 2013 13:21, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > > On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 07:51 +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > > I don't believe this is that much practiced on LKML. I know at least > > one developer who does this, but he's probably the exception. I more > > often see counter proposals just as if two authors were fighting to > > get their patch merged. > > And getting cursed out on LKML is also the exception and not the rule. > But it's the bad apples that seem to stand out. People say how horrible > LKML is, but as mentioned in the thread, Slashdot is a much worse place > to post than LKML. The difference with LKML is that you may deserve the > cursing you get. > > -- Steve > > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 12:30 ` Ricardo Ferreira @ 2013-07-17 13:03 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-17 13:10 ` Willy Tarreau ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-17 13:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ricardo Ferreira Cc: Willy Tarreau, Jeff Liu, Sarah Sharp, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 13:30 +0100, Ricardo Ferreira wrote: > Slashdot is just a cesspool of trolls, not a good comparison. Point taken. I posted this privately, and I think I'll repost it here. I need to modify it a bit as it wasn't meant to be public. When I started sending patches to LKML it was not the cursing I was afraid of, it was the possibility of top notch developers pointing out my flaws. Linux is intimidating not because it can be harsh, but because its the big league. You are posting code not only to the world but also to some of the best programmers on the planet, and frankly, that's really scary. And I think that's the real reason people who are shy tend not to want to participate. They use the harshness of LKML as an excuse, but I think it's really that they may be insecure about their own work and how it will compare with the best of the best. Both my wife and I have done karate for decades. My wife has even won a national tournament. She can do demos without a problem, but when she has to get up in front of other top black belts, she's a nervous wreck. She's her biggest critic, but she tends to know that when performing in front of people as good as she is, or better, they can see her flaws as much as she can. That is intimidating. The point I'm making is that we need to find out what is preventing good developers from joining the Linux community. Is it really the harshness of the project, or is it because we expect you to have the best code, and you will not be accepted if you are not that good. And I do not want people joining that are not good programmers. The answer is not to bash Linus into being a nice guy (which seems to be what Sarah's trying to do), but we can get mentors or even "scouts" to look for people of talent and help them get into the community. What those people need is not a nicer LKML that will let mediocre developers in, but someone that recognizes their talent and encourages them to join, by reinforcing to them how good of a developer they are. I've helped people this way. Talented programmers that were unsure of themselves, and they have done extremely well in our community. -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 13:03 ` Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-17 13:10 ` Willy Tarreau 2013-07-17 15:02 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-17 22:55 ` Guenter Roeck 2 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Willy Tarreau @ 2013-07-17 13:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Ricardo Ferreira, Jeff Liu, Sarah Sharp, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 09:03:35AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 13:30 +0100, Ricardo Ferreira wrote: > > Slashdot is just a cesspool of trolls, not a good comparison. > > Point taken. > > I posted this privately, and I think I'll repost it here. I need to > modify it a bit as it wasn't meant to be public. > > > When I started sending patches to LKML it was not the cursing I was > afraid of, it was the possibility of top notch developers pointing out > my flaws. Linux is intimidating not because it can be harsh, but because > its the big league. You are posting code not only to the world but also > to some of the best programmers on the planet, and frankly, that's > really scary. And I think that's the real reason people who are shy tend > not to want to participate. They use the harshness of LKML as an excuse, > but I think it's really that they may be insecure about their own work > and how it will compare with the best of the best. > > Both my wife and I have done karate for decades. My wife has even won a > national tournament. She can do demos without a problem, but when she > has to get up in front of other top black belts, she's a nervous wreck. > She's her biggest critic, but she tends to know that when performing in > front of people as good as she is, or better, they can see her flaws as > much as she can. That is intimidating. > > The point I'm making is that we need to find out what is preventing good > developers from joining the Linux community. Is it really the harshness > of the project, or is it because we expect you to have the best code, > and you will not be accepted if you are not that good. And I do not want > people joining that are not good programmers. > > The answer is not to bash Linus into being a nice guy (which seems to be > what Sarah's trying to do), but we can get mentors or even "scouts" to > look for people of talent and help them get into the community. What > those people need is not a nicer LKML that will let mediocre developers > in, but someone that recognizes their talent and encourages them to > join, by reinforcing to them how good of a developer they are. I've > helped people this way. Talented programmers that were unsure of > themselves, and they have done extremely well in our community. +1 Willy ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 13:03 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-17 13:10 ` Willy Tarreau @ 2013-07-17 15:02 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-17 15:16 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-17 22:55 ` Guenter Roeck 2 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-17 15:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Ricardo Ferreira, Willy Tarreau, Jeff Liu, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 09:03:35AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > The point I'm making is that we need to find out what is preventing good > developers from joining the Linux community. Is it really the harshness > of the project, or is it because we expect you to have the best code, > and you will not be accepted if you are not that good. And I do not want > people joining that are not good programmers. Or does our documentation for getting new developers on board suck? Or do we simply need to have more mentors to help newcomers move from their first checkpatch cleanup patch to larger projects? Or do minorities simply choose not to participate, because they see homophobic emails like the 'deep throat' email, and decide they're likely to face racism or sexism on the mailing list as well? There are a lot of reasons newcomers don't want to join, or don't feel they can join. Unless we did some sort of survey to ask why people don't participate, we won't know why they aren't. Oh, BTW, someone did do an informal survey on why people do or don't contribute to open source project. They gave a talk at Open Source Bridge entitled, "No, I won't contribute to your OS project". You can see the results of her poll, and her talk here: https://www.zotero.org/groups/obridge_2013_os_contrib https://www.dropbox.com/s/c6vjtx1zcdzejgw/foss_contributions.pdf > The answer is not to bash Linus into being a nice guy (which seems to be > what Sarah's trying to do), but we can get mentors or even "scouts" to > look for people of talent and help them get into the community. What > those people need is not a nicer LKML that will let mediocre developers > in, but someone that recognizes their talent and encourages them to > join, by reinforcing to them how good of a developer they are. I've > helped people this way. Talented programmers that were unsure of > themselves, and they have done extremely well in our community. Are you volunteering to be a mentor for the FOSS Outreach Program for Women? ;) I will happily take more mentors for the next round in November! http://kernelnewbies.org/OPWIntro Sarah Sharp ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 15:02 ` Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-17 15:16 ` Steven Rostedt 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-17 15:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: Ricardo Ferreira, Willy Tarreau, Jeff Liu, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 08:02 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > Are you volunteering to be a mentor for the FOSS Outreach Program for > Women? ;) I will happily take more mentors for the next round in > November! If you have someone interested in Real Time OS development. Sure! -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 13:03 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-17 13:10 ` Willy Tarreau 2013-07-17 15:02 ` Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-17 22:55 ` Guenter Roeck 2 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Guenter Roeck @ 2013-07-17 22:55 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Ricardo Ferreira, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Ingo Molnar, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linus Torvalds, Willy Tarreau On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 09:03:35AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 13:30 +0100, Ricardo Ferreira wrote: > > Slashdot is just a cesspool of trolls, not a good comparison. > > Point taken. > > I posted this privately, and I think I'll repost it here. I need to > modify it a bit as it wasn't meant to be public. > > > When I started sending patches to LKML it was not the cursing I was > afraid of, it was the possibility of top notch developers pointing out > my flaws. Linux is intimidating not because it can be harsh, but because > its the big league. You are posting code not only to the world but also > to some of the best programmers on the planet, and frankly, that's > really scary. And I think that's the real reason people who are shy tend > not to want to participate. They use the harshness of LKML as an excuse, > but I think it's really that they may be insecure about their own work > and how it will compare with the best of the best. > > Both my wife and I have done karate for decades. My wife has even won a > national tournament. She can do demos without a problem, but when she > has to get up in front of other top black belts, she's a nervous wreck. > She's her biggest critic, but she tends to know that when performing in > front of people as good as she is, or better, they can see her flaws as > much as she can. That is intimidating. > > The point I'm making is that we need to find out what is preventing good > developers from joining the Linux community. Is it really the harshness > of the project, or is it because we expect you to have the best code, > and you will not be accepted if you are not that good. And I do not want > people joining that are not good programmers. > Preventing good developers from joining - I don't know. Maybe there just are not that many. I have heard lots of reasons for not paricipating in open source development. The "official" stated reason is often around "not exposing our IP", where "IP" is sometimes declared to be each line of code. Another is "we don't want to help our competitors". Personally I believe that being afraid is only part of the picture. Good developers should ultimately know that their code is good, and not be afraid to show it (or find a mentor to encourage them). However, I have to say that that much of the code I have seen in my life is _not_ good, or crap as is referred to by many in the Linux community. To some degree includes my own code - if I encounter code I have written ten years ago, I often think "did I really write this crap ?". I think _that_ is a key reason for people not participating - they are afraid that their code might be exposed as crap. A corrolary of that might be that some companies don't want their customers to see how bad the code is they are shipping to them. > The answer is not to bash Linus into being a nice guy (which seems to be > what Sarah's trying to do), but we can get mentors or even "scouts" to > look for people of talent and help them get into the community. What > those people need is not a nicer LKML that will let mediocre developers > in, but someone that recognizes their talent and encourages them to > join, by reinforcing to them how good of a developer they are. I've > helped people this way. Talented programmers that were unsure of > themselves, and they have done extremely well in our community. > Excellent summary. I absolutely agree. Thanks, Guenter ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 0:51 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-17 1:23 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-17 5:51 ` Willy Tarreau @ 2013-07-17 9:15 ` Jeff Liu 2013-07-17 10:58 ` James Bottomley 2 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Jeff Liu @ 2013-07-17 9:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Sarah Sharp, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On 07/17/2013 08:51 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 08:32 +0800, Jeff Liu wrote: > >> Another thing might deviated from the main theme, but I'd like to raise it >> here because I would like to see what's the proper way for that. >> >> For instance, people A posted a patch set to the mailing list at first, >> people B think that there are some issues in A's implementation, and he >> happened to play around the same stuff recently, so he submitted another >> patch series. Finally, people B made it. >> (In that period, people A kept silent, maybe because he/she was unhappy) >> >> This is a actual occurrence I once observed from a subsystem list(my >> apologies, I just want to talk this case rather than against somebody), >> it seems people A is a new comer(because I can not searched any past >> commits of him/her from the git log), people B is definitely a senior guy. >> >> So that's my question, is that a proper collaboration form in kernel >> community? Does it better if people B could give some suggestions to >> help A to improve the code, especially if those help would help A stepping >> into the kernel development -- maybe it's depend largely on one's opinion. :( > > This is a completely different issue from the one in this thread, but it > is also a legitimate issue and honestly, a bigger one than perceived > insults. > > Is it proper collaboration? Absolutely not. Something that I try to be > sensitive to as it's something I can do as well. There's been things on > my todo list, where someone would send me patches that do it. I would be > thinking "darn it, I wanted to do it" and even worse, the patches that > were sent wouldn't be of the way I wanted them. But I've tried to be > good, and instead of just going about and implementing it myself, I > would try to help the person massage the patches into what I wanted. It's kind of you. Generally, most forks are nice enough in helping others. Actually, I only noticed once of something like that the year before. Well, I just received an offline email from my college a fews hours ago as she checked this topic and unfortunately, she has experienced the same thing a few days ago. > That takes a lot of effort and discipline, and honestly, helping someone > else do the work you wanted is much harder than just doing it yourself. Exactly, so I always appreciate the patch reviewers. Thanks, -Jeff > > Sometimes the maintainer just takes the easier route, and does the work > themselves (because it's also more fun too). But that's really a slap in > the face of the person that submitted the work in the first place. If > anything hurts the community, it's this behavior. Not Linus giving > someone an ass wipe. > > -- Steve > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 9:15 ` Jeff Liu @ 2013-07-17 10:58 ` James Bottomley 2013-07-17 11:13 ` Jeff Liu 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: James Bottomley @ 2013-07-17 10:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jeff Liu Cc: Steven Rostedt, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Ingo Molnar, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linus Torvalds, Willy Tarreau On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 17:15 +0800, Jeff Liu wrote: > On 07/17/2013 08:51 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 08:32 +0800, Jeff Liu wrote: > > > >> Another thing might deviated from the main theme, but I'd like to raise it > >> here because I would like to see what's the proper way for that. > >> > >> For instance, people A posted a patch set to the mailing list at first, > >> people B think that there are some issues in A's implementation, and he > >> happened to play around the same stuff recently, so he submitted another > >> patch series. Finally, people B made it. > >> (In that period, people A kept silent, maybe because he/she was unhappy) > >> > >> This is a actual occurrence I once observed from a subsystem list(my > >> apologies, I just want to talk this case rather than against somebody), > >> it seems people A is a new comer(because I can not searched any past > >> commits of him/her from the git log), people B is definitely a senior guy. > >> > >> So that's my question, is that a proper collaboration form in kernel > >> community? Does it better if people B could give some suggestions to > >> help A to improve the code, especially if those help would help A stepping > >> into the kernel development -- maybe it's depend largely on one's opinion. :( > > > > This is a completely different issue from the one in this thread, but it > > is also a legitimate issue and honestly, a bigger one than perceived > > insults. > > > > Is it proper collaboration? Absolutely not. Something that I try to be > > sensitive to as it's something I can do as well. There's been things on > > my todo list, where someone would send me patches that do it. I would be > > thinking "darn it, I wanted to do it" and even worse, the patches that > > were sent wouldn't be of the way I wanted them. But I've tried to be > > good, and instead of just going about and implementing it myself, I > > would try to help the person massage the patches into what I wanted. > > It's kind of you. Generally, most forks are nice enough in helping others. > Actually, I only noticed once of something like that the year before. > Well, I just received an offline email from my college a fews hours ago as > she checked this topic and unfortunately, she has experienced the same thing > a few days ago. If you want a quiet investigation, I or one of the other maintainers can do it offline (you'll need to send the details via private email). Just for your information, though, I've done this sort of thing before too. This is probably the most egregious example: http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=2908d778ab3e244900c310974e1fc1c69066e450 James ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 10:58 ` James Bottomley @ 2013-07-17 11:13 ` Jeff Liu 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Jeff Liu @ 2013-07-17 11:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: James Bottomley Cc: Steven Rostedt, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Ingo Molnar, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linus Torvalds, Willy Tarreau On 07/17/2013 06:58 PM, James Bottomley wrote: > On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 17:15 +0800, Jeff Liu wrote: >> On 07/17/2013 08:51 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote: >> >>> On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 08:32 +0800, Jeff Liu wrote: >>> >>>> Another thing might deviated from the main theme, but I'd like to raise it >>>> here because I would like to see what's the proper way for that. >>>> >>>> For instance, people A posted a patch set to the mailing list at first, >>>> people B think that there are some issues in A's implementation, and he >>>> happened to play around the same stuff recently, so he submitted another >>>> patch series. Finally, people B made it. >>>> (In that period, people A kept silent, maybe because he/she was unhappy) >>>> >>>> This is a actual occurrence I once observed from a subsystem list(my >>>> apologies, I just want to talk this case rather than against somebody), >>>> it seems people A is a new comer(because I can not searched any past >>>> commits of him/her from the git log), people B is definitely a senior guy. >>>> >>>> So that's my question, is that a proper collaboration form in kernel >>>> community? Does it better if people B could give some suggestions to >>>> help A to improve the code, especially if those help would help A stepping >>>> into the kernel development -- maybe it's depend largely on one's opinion. :( >>> >>> This is a completely different issue from the one in this thread, but it >>> is also a legitimate issue and honestly, a bigger one than perceived >>> insults. >>> >>> Is it proper collaboration? Absolutely not. Something that I try to be >>> sensitive to as it's something I can do as well. There's been things on >>> my todo list, where someone would send me patches that do it. I would be >>> thinking "darn it, I wanted to do it" and even worse, the patches that >>> were sent wouldn't be of the way I wanted them. But I've tried to be >>> good, and instead of just going about and implementing it myself, I >>> would try to help the person massage the patches into what I wanted. >> >> It's kind of you. Generally, most forks are nice enough in helping others. >> Actually, I only noticed once of something like that the year before. >> Well, I just received an offline email from my college a fews hours ago as >> she checked this topic and unfortunately, she has experienced the same thing >> a few days ago. > > If you want a quiet investigation, I or one of the other maintainers can > do it offline (you'll need to send the details via private email). Just > for your information, though, I've done this sort of thing before too. > This is probably the most egregious example: I'll send out those info for your investigation in a little while. Thanks, -Jeff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-16 22:43 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-16 22:54 ` Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-16 23:01 ` Randy Dunlap 2013-07-16 23:50 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) Theodore Ts'o 2 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Randy Dunlap @ 2013-07-16 23:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: Theodore Ts'o, Olivier Galibert, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, stable, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On 07/16/13 15:43, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > Yes, that's true. Some kernel developers are better at moderating their > comments and tone towards individuals who are "sensitive". Others > simply don't give a shit. So we need to figure out how to meet > somewhere in the middle, in order to establish a baseline of civility. So it's polite enough to curse if you don't direct it at anyone in particular? I'm sensitive so I disagree. -- ~Randy ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) 2013-07-16 22:43 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-16 22:54 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-16 23:01 ` Randy Dunlap @ 2013-07-16 23:50 ` Theodore Ts'o 2013-07-17 2:18 ` Ben Hutchings 2 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Theodore Ts'o @ 2013-07-16 23:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: Olivier Galibert, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, stable, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 03:43:57PM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > I don't think we disagree on this, Ted. I've stated that I view > personal attacks and insults negatively, and I don't see an issue with > pointing out that code is bad. I think you're agreeing with me on this. Perhaps I misundrestood you, then; when you replied to Olivier's message, which used as his example "your code is crap", and "Let's leverage my fifth grade nephew's capabilities to assist you in fixing the code", it seemed to me that you called one a "personal attack", and the other an "indirect personal insults". If we're trying to say that "words matter", then it would be useful if we are careful in what we describe as "a personal atack", and what gets described as "abuse". For example, when you brought up the example of Linus yelling at Mauro, most of what I saw was Linus "yelling" (electronically) about his behaviour being unacceptable. I saw mostly, "your behaviour is idiotic", not "you are an idiot". Which perhaps is a finer gradation than the difference between "your code is crap" and "you are crap". Still, while I might call Linus's words to Mauro many things, "a personal attack" wouldn't have been one of those words. Emphatic? Yes. Yelling? Yes. Something I wouldn't do? Probably. But "A personal attack"? I'm not so sure. And then when you start reading comments from folks forua suc as G+ and Hacker News calling Linus "a dick" or "a douchebag", the irony is quite palpable.... > > Keep in mind that there are some cultures where even pointing out a > > technical flaw in code might considered bringing deep shame on the > > engineer and their company. So how sensitive people are to criticism > > during an electronic exchange is always going to be highly culutrally > > and personally variable. > > Yes, that's true. Some kernel developers are better at moderating their > comments and tone towards individuals who are "sensitive". ... and actually, I think it's actually quite difficult to find cases where Linus has used a very harsh tone towards someone who would be "sensitive". The argument which I've more commonly heard is one of "collatoral damage". That is, that people other than the transgressor of the bad behaviour see Linus's messages, and (a) don't realize that the vast majority of his e-mails are not that harsh, and (b) assume that Linus would use that language on them. And certainly that is a downside of sending messages of chastisement publically rather than privately. I doubt that neither Linus nor you would disagee that there is a downside tradeoff. On the other hand, if such messages are sent priviately, they are much less useful as far as establishing community norms around technical excellence, especially in regards to "no regressions" and "don't break userspace". I suspect that you and he come down on different sides of the question, "is it worth the tradeoff". The other question where I think you and Linus differ is the belief whether polite messages of the form, "it's really rude to break the kernel ABI, I would rather prefer if you wouldn't do that" are as effective at establishing community norms, compared with his style of e-mail messagtes, and whether the priority in establishing community norms around technical excellence compares with the priority around community norms around "civility". (And of course, what is considered "civil", and what is considered a "personal attack", and what isn't.) Hopefully this helps to clarify the discussion. I'm trying rather purposely not take one side or another, but instead trying to articulate what I think I've been hearing people say (over, and over, and over again, on this very long mail thread). Regards, - Ted ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) 2013-07-16 23:50 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) Theodore Ts'o @ 2013-07-17 2:18 ` Ben Hutchings 2013-07-17 3:02 ` Linus Torvalds 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Ben Hutchings @ 2013-07-17 2:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Theodore Ts'o, Linus Torvalds Cc: Sarah Sharp, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Ingo Molnar, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1566 bytes --] On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 19:50 -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 03:43:57PM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: [...] > > > Keep in mind that there are some cultures where even pointing out a > > > technical flaw in code might considered bringing deep shame on the > > > engineer and their company. So how sensitive people are to criticism > > > during an electronic exchange is always going to be highly culutrally > > > and personally variable. > > > > Yes, that's true. Some kernel developers are better at moderating their > > comments and tone towards individuals who are "sensitive". > > ... and actually, I think it's actually quite difficult to find cases > where Linus has used a very harsh tone towards someone who would be > "sensitive". [...] Someone wrote on debian-private a little while back that 'I will not work on anything Linus might be involved in', and in a later mail linked to this example of abuse: http://mark.dreamwidth.org/22320.html Honestly, if I had seen newbies being treated that way before I was involved, I may well have made the same resolution. As it happens, when I made a quite basic mistake in the format one of my first patches back in 1999, Linus was entirely polite in correcting me. In fact, even in the pull request that's referenced here, Linus, you were polite but firm in your first two responses. When you're perfectly capable of doing that, why spoil it by adding insults? Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Humans are not rational beings; they are rationalising beings. [-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) 2013-07-17 2:18 ` Ben Hutchings @ 2013-07-17 3:02 ` Linus Torvalds 2013-07-17 3:16 ` Ben Hutchings 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Linus Torvalds @ 2013-07-17 3:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ben Hutchings Cc: Theodore Ts'o, Sarah Sharp, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Ingo Molnar, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 7:18 PM, Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> wrote: > > In fact, even in the pull request that's referenced here, Linus, you > were polite but firm in your first two responses. When you're perfectly > capable of doing that, why spoil it by adding insults? Umm. Notice how the "Joseph" I replied to had deleted all the comments he wrote? That should tell you something. I smacked down a troll. If I was polite to you all those years ago, and I was polite but firm in the two first responses, please give me credit for when I smack somebody down. There may be a reason for it. The fact that the person deleted his messages (or github deleted them for him - I have no idea what their comment policy is) and you cannot see that context any more online should not make you think that I suddenly went crazy. Btw, since I get the github messages in email too, I have a copy. Joseph replied to those "polite but firm" messages where I explained exactly *why* I don't want to bother with github pull requests with this gem: "I did not realizes that Linus' shit does not stink. Thanks for clearing that up..." Quite frankly, I think I was quite polite enough. Exactly *because* I had been polite but firm before that injection. The fact is, I don't suffer fools nicely. I call it like I see it, and I called him a moron for entering the discussion with a totally content-free comment. Feel free to disagree. Maybe you see some value in the troll comment? And I somehow suspect that your message that I replied to back in 1999 was somehow more relevant? Yes? No? Linus ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) 2013-07-17 3:02 ` Linus Torvalds @ 2013-07-17 3:16 ` Ben Hutchings 2013-07-17 4:48 ` Linus Torvalds 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Ben Hutchings @ 2013-07-17 3:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Theodore Ts'o, Sarah Sharp, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Ingo Molnar, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1977 bytes --] On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 20:02 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 7:18 PM, Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> wrote: > > > > In fact, even in the pull request that's referenced here, Linus, you > > were polite but firm in your first two responses. When you're perfectly > > capable of doing that, why spoil it by adding insults? > > Umm. Notice how the "Joseph" I replied to had deleted all the comments he wrote? Sorry, that completely escaped me. > That should tell you something. I smacked down a troll. > > If I was polite to you all those years ago, and I was polite but firm > in the two first responses, please give me credit for when I smack > somebody down. There may be a reason for it. The fact that the person > deleted his messages (or github deleted them for him - I have no idea > what their comment policy is) and you cannot see that context any more > online should not make you think that I suddenly went crazy. Unfortunately, it seems I'm not the only one to be confused by this. > Btw, since I get the github messages in email too, I have a copy. > Joseph replied to those "polite but firm" messages where I explained > exactly *why* I don't want to bother with github pull requests with > this gem: > > "I did not realizes that Linus' shit does not stink. Thanks for > clearing that up..." > > Quite frankly, I think I was quite polite enough. Exactly *because* I > had been polite but firm before that injection. > > The fact is, I don't suffer fools nicely. I call it like I see it, and > I called him a moron for entering the discussion with a totally > content-free comment. > > Feel free to disagree. Maybe you see some value in the troll comment? Indeed not. > And I somehow suspect that your message that I replied to back in 1999 > was somehow more relevant? Yes? No? Yes. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Humans are not rational beings; they are rationalising beings. [-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) 2013-07-17 3:16 ` Ben Hutchings @ 2013-07-17 4:48 ` Linus Torvalds 2013-07-17 5:22 ` Darren Hart 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Linus Torvalds @ 2013-07-17 4:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ben Hutchings Cc: Theodore Ts'o, Sarah Sharp, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Ingo Molnar, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 8:16 PM, Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> wrote: > On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 20:02 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> >> Umm. Notice how the "Joseph" I replied to had deleted all the comments he wrote? > > Sorry, that completely escaped me. > >> That should tell you something. I smacked down a troll. >> >> If I was polite to you all those years ago, and I was polite but firm >> in the two first responses, please give me credit for when I smack >> somebody down. There may be a reason for it. The fact that the person >> deleted his messages (or github deleted them for him - I have no idea >> what their comment policy is) and you cannot see that context any more >> online should not make you think that I suddenly went crazy. > > Unfortunately, it seems I'm not the only one to be confused by this. Heh. I think this one is a pretty extreme example (because the context simply is no longer *there*), but the fact is, it's not uncommon. People think I get all the credit (and hey, I do), but here's a somewhat darker side to the story too. I get a lot of grief too, and usually from people who don't have the context. In the blog you posted, it was because the context simply wasn't there any more, but let's be honest: even when the context is there, how many people read it? It's a cesspool out there (*cough*slashdot*cough*). And hey, I think Sarah's outburst itself was due to a similar "I know Linus curses at people, and who cares about context, it's never acceptable". Because I guarantee that it was *not* because of the actual email she replied to, or anything I've written her. Feel free to go back and check. I'm really not complaining. It's part of my job, and I'm quite used to it. This is not new. Certain people and places love to hate on Linus, the egotistical ass. And hey, on the whole I can honestly say that I'm *way* ahead. They aren't exactly wrong - it's not like I have a weak ego. I get most annoyed when people say it's "new" and due to the success of Linux. Dammit, I had a strong ego when I started this whole thing, so don't try to chalk it all up to success. Guys, I love my job. The kernel developer community is great. But I suspect that some of you don't necessarily think about the other side. I had slashdot discussing my abusive relationship with my wife and kids thanks to Sarah's comments. Talk about having a thick skin - trust me when I tell you that I get as well as I give out. Linus ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) 2013-07-17 4:48 ` Linus Torvalds @ 2013-07-17 5:22 ` Darren Hart 2013-07-17 5:32 ` Sarah Sharp 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Darren Hart @ 2013-07-17 5:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ben Hutchings, Theodore Ts'o, Sarah Sharp, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Ingo Molnar, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 21:48 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Guys, I love my job. The kernel developer community is great. But I > suspect that some of you don't necessarily think about the other side. > I had slashdot discussing my abusive relationship with my wife and > kids thanks to Sarah's comments. Talk about having a thick skin - > trust me when I tell you that I get as well as I give out. That's awful. People suck. I stopped reading slashdot years ago for the quality of the content and commentary, apparently it has not improved. -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center Yocto Project - Linux Kernel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) 2013-07-17 5:22 ` Darren Hart @ 2013-07-17 5:32 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-17 17:41 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML Randy Dunlap 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-17 5:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Darren Hart Cc: Linus Torvalds, Ben Hutchings, Theodore Ts'o, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Ingo Molnar, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 10:22:38PM -0700, Darren Hart wrote: > On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 21:48 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > Guys, I love my job. The kernel developer community is great. But I > > suspect that some of you don't necessarily think about the other side. > > I had slashdot discussing my abusive relationship with my wife and > > kids thanks to Sarah's comments. Talk about having a thick skin - > > trust me when I tell you that I get as well as I give out. > > That's awful. People suck. I stopped reading slashdot years ago for the > quality of the content and commentary, apparently it has not improved. Slashdot, Hacker News, and Reddit are all cesspools. I would much rather discuss this topic on LKML or at KS than wade through that muck. Bah, let's settle this at KS, away from the court of public opinion. Sarah Sharp ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 5:32 ` Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-17 17:41 ` Randy Dunlap 2013-07-17 17:59 ` Steven Rostedt 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Randy Dunlap @ 2013-07-17 17:41 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: Darren Hart, Linus Torvalds, Ben Hutchings, Theodore Ts'o, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Ingo Molnar, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau On 07/16/13 22:32, Sarah Sharp wrote: > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 10:22:38PM -0700, Darren Hart wrote: >> On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 21:48 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> >>> Guys, I love my job. The kernel developer community is great. But I >>> suspect that some of you don't necessarily think about the other side. >>> I had slashdot discussing my abusive relationship with my wife and >>> kids thanks to Sarah's comments. Talk about having a thick skin - >>> trust me when I tell you that I get as well as I give out. >> >> That's awful. People suck. I stopped reading slashdot years ago for the >> quality of the content and commentary, apparently it has not improved. > > Slashdot, Hacker News, and Reddit are all cesspools. I would much > rather discuss this topic on LKML or at KS than wade through that muck. > > Bah, let's settle this at KS, away from the court of public opinion. The only advantage to that is that it is face to face. The big disadvantage is that it leaves out several hundred (or thousdand) people. IOW, I would rather see continued discussion. Or the patch. :) -- ~Randy ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 17:41 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML Randy Dunlap @ 2013-07-17 17:59 ` Steven Rostedt 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2013-07-17 17:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Randy Dunlap Cc: Sarah Sharp, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Linus Torvalds, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, stable, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Willy Tarreau, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Ingo Molnar On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 10:41 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > The big disadvantage is that it leaves out several hundred (or thousdand) > people. I see that as an advantage ;-) We could video tape it for the entertainment value. -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) 2013-07-16 21:12 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-16 21:27 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] " Theodore Ts'o @ 2013-07-16 22:18 ` Willy Tarreau 2013-07-16 22:39 ` Sarah Sharp 1 sibling, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Willy Tarreau @ 2013-07-16 22:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: Olivier Galibert, David Lang, Steven Rostedt, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, Darren Hart, ksummit-2013-discuss On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 02:12:35PM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > I *hate* both direct personal insults and indirect personal insults. > Neither should be acceptable in our community. > > As I stated in an email to Rusty, what I'm objecting to here is not > kernel developers criticizing code. I'm objecting to personal attacks, > and developers directing personal verbal abuse towards each other. This > include all developers, not just Linus. Well, there are people like me who don't mind getting personally insulted but who are really pained when their work is criticized. You'd rather tell me I'm a fucking moron than all what I carefully designed, wrote and tested is pure crap. Probably that part of the reason is that I'm as I am and I'm not really responsible for this, so I don't care. Call me ugly if you want, why should I bother ? But if you tell me I did some crap, it's entirely my fault and that hurts a lot more. So you want criticism to change focus for good, but it will not necessarily achieve the result you're expecting. Maybe we can lose more talented people by telling them their work is pure crap because we did not understand it than telling them they're stupid and let them argument their choices. At least I don't claim to know which one is better, all I can say is that what we have right now works well enough in my opinion. Best regards, Willy ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) 2013-07-16 22:18 ` [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) Willy Tarreau @ 2013-07-16 22:39 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-16 23:46 ` [ATTEND] How to act on LKML Casey Schaufler 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-16 22:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Willy Tarreau Cc: Olivier Galibert, David Lang, Steven Rostedt, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, Darren Hart, ksummit-2013-discuss On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 12:18:21AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 02:12:35PM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > I *hate* both direct personal insults and indirect personal insults. > > Neither should be acceptable in our community. > > > > As I stated in an email to Rusty, what I'm objecting to here is not > > kernel developers criticizing code. I'm objecting to personal attacks, > > and developers directing personal verbal abuse towards each other. This > > include all developers, not just Linus. > > Well, there are people like me who don't mind getting personally > insulted but who are really pained when their work is criticized. > > You'd rather tell me I'm a fucking moron than all what I carefully > designed, wrote and tested is pure crap. Probably that part of the > reason is that I'm as I am and I'm not really responsible for this, > so I don't care. Call me ugly if you want, why should I bother ? But > if you tell me I did some crap, it's entirely my fault and that hurts > a lot more. I think we come from different perspectives here. I can change my code. Therefore, I don't mind my code being insulted. I cannot change myself. Therefore, I don't want to read verbal abuse directed at me personally. Things get blurred when we're talking about something a person did. I can change how I act as a maintainer. Therefore, tell me politely what I did wrong, and I will change it. > So you want criticism to change focus for good, but it will not > necessarily achieve the result you're expecting. Maybe we can lose > more talented people by telling them their work is pure crap because > we did not understand it than telling them they're stupid and let > them argument their choices. At least I don't claim to know which > one is better, all I can say is that what we have right now works > well enough in my opinion. We can tell them their code is bad without calling it crap. Cussing them out is just a lazy shortcut. Sarah Sharp ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-16 22:39 ` Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-16 23:46 ` Casey Schaufler 2013-07-17 1:02 ` Sarah Sharp 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Casey Schaufler @ 2013-07-16 23:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: Willy Tarreau, Olivier Galibert, David Lang, Steven Rostedt, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, Darren Hart, ksummit-2013-discuss On 7/16/2013 3:39 PM, Sarah Sharp wrote: > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 12:18:21AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 02:12:35PM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: >>> I *hate* both direct personal insults and indirect personal insults. >>> Neither should be acceptable in our community. >>> >>> As I stated in an email to Rusty, what I'm objecting to here is not >>> kernel developers criticizing code. I'm objecting to personal attacks, >>> and developers directing personal verbal abuse towards each other. This >>> include all developers, not just Linus. >> Well, there are people like me who don't mind getting personally >> insulted but who are really pained when their work is criticized. >> >> You'd rather tell me I'm a fucking moron than all what I carefully >> designed, wrote and tested is pure crap. Probably that part of the >> reason is that I'm as I am and I'm not really responsible for this, >> so I don't care. Call me ugly if you want, why should I bother ? But >> if you tell me I did some crap, it's entirely my fault and that hurts >> a lot more. > I think we come from different perspectives here. I can change my code. > Therefore, I don't mind my code being insulted. I cannot change myself. Sure you can, he began politely. It's a process called personal growth, and it happens to most of us as we go through life. It is in reasonable to expect change and to some degree manage the way in which one's self changes. It is unreasonable and expect to manage changes in others, although we do insist on trying. Communities develop expectations of behavior based on many factors. No community responds well to individuals who demand changes in the norms of the community. This is especially true when the change is a demand that some aspect of the community that is seen as unique or empowering by the members of the community be suppressed. Email communities are notorious for what would be considered inexcusable behavior in most other kinds of community. I do not know of any explanation, nor will I attempt to justify the claim. I suspect that the relative anonymity has something to do with it, as does the fact you can't actually raise your voice or glare. Or smile smugly, for that matter. The norms of the Linux kernel community have changed over time, and will continue to do so. Communities, like the individuals that make them up, change over time. Linus and Al Viro have changed over the years. I have changed over the years. If you stick around, you will too. If you don't you'll still change, but in different ways. The changes that the community makes may or may not suit you when they happen. You can certainly work to influence the behavior of the community. Demanding that the community change to suit your desires doesn't work in your apartment building (dorm, homeowner's association or county courthouse) either. That's basic social behavior. Look to yourself for change before you look to change others. It works better. > Therefore, I don't want to read verbal abuse directed at me personally. > > Things get blurred when we're talking about something a person did. > I can change how I act as a maintainer. Therefore, tell me politely > what I did wrong, and I will change it. > >> So you want criticism to change focus for good, but it will not >> necessarily achieve the result you're expecting. Maybe we can lose >> more talented people by telling them their work is pure crap because >> we did not understand it than telling them they're stupid and let >> them argument their choices. At least I don't claim to know which >> one is better, all I can say is that what we have right now works >> well enough in my opinion. > We can tell them their code is bad without calling it crap. Cussing > them out is just a lazy shortcut. > > Sarah Sharp > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-16 23:46 ` [ATTEND] How to act on LKML Casey Schaufler @ 2013-07-17 1:02 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-17 14:27 ` Felipe Contreras 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-17 1:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Casey Schaufler Cc: Willy Tarreau, Olivier Galibert, David Lang, Steven Rostedt, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, Darren Hart, ksummit-2013-discuss On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 04:46:33PM -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote: > On 7/16/2013 3:39 PM, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 12:18:21AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > >> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 02:12:35PM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > >>> I *hate* both direct personal insults and indirect personal insults. > >>> Neither should be acceptable in our community. > >>> > >>> As I stated in an email to Rusty, what I'm objecting to here is not > >>> kernel developers criticizing code. I'm objecting to personal attacks, > >>> and developers directing personal verbal abuse towards each other. This > >>> include all developers, not just Linus. > >> Well, there are people like me who don't mind getting personally > >> insulted but who are really pained when their work is criticized. > >> > >> You'd rather tell me I'm a fucking moron than all what I carefully > >> designed, wrote and tested is pure crap. Probably that part of the > >> reason is that I'm as I am and I'm not really responsible for this, > >> so I don't care. Call me ugly if you want, why should I bother ? But > >> if you tell me I did some crap, it's entirely my fault and that hurts > >> a lot more. > > I think we come from different perspectives here. I can change my code. > > Therefore, I don't mind my code being insulted. I cannot change myself. > > Sure you can, he began politely. > > It's a process called personal growth, and it happens to most > of us as we go through life. It is in reasonable to expect change > and to some degree manage the way in which one's self changes. It > is unreasonable and expect to manage changes in others, although we > do insist on trying. Personal change does happen, but at a much slower pace. And it takes both a will to change, and incentive in order for change to happen. If someone wants personal change in others or in the community, there needs to be both incentive to change, and a will to change in the community. I've provided examples and personal stories in an attempt to give incentive to change. I cannot force on anyone the will to change, nor would I want to. I cannot "manage" change in others. I can only politely point out that the current community behavior does hurt other people, and keep people from contributing. > Communities develop expectations of behavior based on many factors. > No community responds well to individuals who demand changes in the > norms of the community. This is especially true when the change is > a demand that some aspect of the community that is seen as unique > or empowering by the members of the community be suppressed. The majority in the community never reacts well to minority voices in the community asking for change. (Note, I'm talking a majority of numbers, not a racial or gender minority.) I'm not demanding change. I'm merely asking to discuss the possibly of change at KS. > Email communities are notorious for what would be considered > inexcusable behavior in most other kinds of community. I do not > know of any explanation, nor will I attempt to justify the claim. > I suspect that the relative anonymity has something to do with it, > as does the fact you can't actually raise your voice or glare. Or > smile smugly, for that matter. I do smile often in email. :) And be sad. :( And be apologetic. :-/ Smug. ^~^ Angry. >:[ Sarcastic. ;) Trolling/crazy. 8) D'oh. (>.<) Worried. (>_>); Disappointed. (-_-) Kitty! =^_^= Meow! Be creative. There are ways of expressing emotion without cussing. > The norms of the Linux kernel community have changed over time, > and will continue to do so. Communities, like the individuals that > make them up, change over time. Linus and Al Viro have changed over > the years. I have changed over the years. If you stick around, you > will too. If you don't you'll still change, but in different ways. I do believe I have changed over the six years I've been involved in the kernel. If anything, I've gotten better at being loud, speaking my mind, and figuring out what's bad code and how to politely tell people I don't take their code. I do think it is a mark of respect, both from the community, and from me, that people are actually listening and responding to me raising this issue. The discussion has been mainly civil, even if we disagree. Five, ten years ago, I probably would have gotten flamed out of the community entirely. So, in short, thank you for listening. We may disagree, but I appreciate being listened to. > The changes that the community makes may or may not suit you when > they happen. You can certainly work to influence the behavior of > the community. Demanding that the community change to suit your > desires doesn't work in your apartment building (dorm, homeowner's > association or county courthouse) either. That's basic social > behavior. Look to yourself for change before you look to change > others. It works better. As I mentioned, I have changed much over the past six years. I suspect this particular thread will change me, although over a longer period of time, and in ways that may not be immediately obvious to the community. I suspect the same will be true of changes in the community. The point is that if no one stands up and asks for change, nothing will change. I do not demand, I merely ask for people to consider change. Sarah Sharp ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 1:02 ` Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-17 14:27 ` Felipe Contreras 2013-07-17 18:24 ` Luck, Tony 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Felipe Contreras @ 2013-07-17 14:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sarah Sharp Cc: Casey Schaufler, Willy Tarreau, Olivier Galibert, David Lang, Steven Rostedt, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, Darren Hart, ksummit-2013-discuss On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Sarah Sharp <sarah.a.sharp@linux.intel.com> wrote: > I've provided examples and personal stories in an attempt to give > incentive to change. Those are just stories; things that happened. What you need to provide is *evidence* that if the community changes, things will be better, and unless you have a study of series of collaborative groups like the Linux kernel, that demonstrates that suppressing swearing has a positive effect in the community, I'd say all you have is an *opinion*. > I cannot force on anyone the will to change, nor > would I want to. I cannot "manage" change in others. I can only > politely point out that the current community behavior does hurt other > people, and keep people from contributing. Which people have been hurt? Mauro? I would like to hear that from him. Another recipient of your stories was Rafael, and he already said he didn't feel personally attacked. I have also been a recipient of Linus' cursing, and I don't see any reason to change. But the more important question is; was the cursing justified? In the case of Mauro, it most definitely was, because as Linus mentioned; he broke the #1 rule of Linux, and that can't be tolerated from a lieutenant. So no, your stories don't prove that any people were hurt, justified or not. But even that is not important, what is important is; was the *project* hurt? I'd say you would need more than a couple of stories to prove that. > I'm not demanding change. I'm merely asking to discuss the possibly of > change at KS. Everything is possible, the question is not "*can* it change", the question is "*should* it change". And again, you need evidence to show that it should. Cheers. -- Felipe Contreras ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* RE: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 14:27 ` Felipe Contreras @ 2013-07-17 18:24 ` Luck, Tony 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Luck, Tony @ 2013-07-17 18:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Felipe Contreras, Sarah Sharp Cc: David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, Ingo Molnar, stable, Casey Schaufler, Linus Torvalds, Willy Tarreau > Those are just stories; things that happened. What you need to provide > is *evidence* that if the community changes, things will be better, > and unless you have a study of series of collaborative groups like the > Linux kernel, that demonstrates that suppressing swearing has a > positive effect in the community, I'd say all you have is an > *opinion*. 1) There isn't going to be any hard evidence - this isn't a physics problem, or even an engineering problem. It's a social problem. There are no other collaborative groups sufficiently similar to the Linux kernel community, so there are no studies that would be relevant. Asking for the impossible is just a lame delaying tactic. 2) Sarah hasn't even asked to cut down on the swearing - so why mention it at all? Did you even read the thread? So I shall (for comedic effect) indulge in my own (uncharacteristic) bit of name calling and dub thee a troll (and every other bad thing that anyone is ever alleged of calling another on LKML, just to be sure). -Tony ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* RE: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML @ 2013-07-17 18:24 ` Luck, Tony 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Luck, Tony @ 2013-07-17 18:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Felipe Contreras, Sarah Sharp Cc: David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, Ingo Molnar, stable, Casey Schaufler, Linus Torvalds, Willy Tarreau > Those are just stories; things that happened. What you need to provide > is *evidence* that if the community changes, things will be better, > and unless you have a study of series of collaborative groups like the > Linux kernel, that demonstrates that suppressing swearing has a > positive effect in the community, I'd say all you have is an > *opinion*. 1) There isn't going to be any hard evidence - this isn't a physics problem, or even an engineering problem. It's a social problem. There are no other collaborative groups sufficiently similar to the Linux kernel community, so there are no studies that would be relevant. Asking for the impossible is just a lame delaying tactic. 2) Sarah hasn't even asked to cut down on the swearing - so why mention it at all? Did you even read the thread? So I shall (for comedic effect) indulge in my own (uncharacteristic) bit of name calling and dub thee a troll (and every other bad thing that anyone is ever alleged of calling another on LKML, just to be sure). -Tony ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-17 18:24 ` Luck, Tony @ 2013-07-17 18:46 ` Felipe Contreras -1 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Felipe Contreras @ 2013-07-17 18:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Luck, Tony Cc: Sarah Sharp, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, Ingo Molnar, stable, Casey Schaufler, Linus Torvalds, Willy Tarreau On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 1:24 PM, Luck, Tony <tony.luck@intel.com> wrote: >> Those are just stories; things that happened. What you need to provide >> is *evidence* that if the community changes, things will be better, >> and unless you have a study of series of collaborative groups like the >> Linux kernel, that demonstrates that suppressing swearing has a >> positive effect in the community, I'd say all you have is an >> *opinion*. > > 1) There isn't going to be any hard evidence - this isn't a physics problem, > or even an engineering problem. It's a social problem. There are no other > collaborative groups sufficiently similar to the Linux kernel community, so there > are no studies that would be relevant. Asking for the impossible is just a > lame delaying tactic. There is evidence for social problems and their solutions, but anyway, so in fact Sarah doesn't *know* if changing that behavior would be beneficial or detrimental to the project. > 2) Sarah hasn't even asked to cut down on the swearing - so why mention > it at all? Did you even read the thread? She didn't ask, she essentially demanded[1]: > I want everyone (including Linus) to be harsh with code but gentle with people. Let's call things by their name; Sarah doesn't know if what she wants will help the project, she merely thinks so. It is merely an **opinion**, it is not backed by evidence, and it might be shared by some Linux developers, but it's still just an opinion. Linus already said he is not going to change, so that's that. Now the only thing that remains open is the discussion about better ways to work together, which probably will happen in the kernel summit, but I think it's pretty clear that an official code of conduct that forbids insulting either people or code is out of the question. Cheers. [1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.stable/58443 -- Felipe Contreras ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML @ 2013-07-17 18:46 ` Felipe Contreras 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Felipe Contreras @ 2013-07-17 18:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Luck, Tony Cc: Sarah Sharp, David Lang, ksummit-2013-discuss, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Olivier Galibert, Ingo Molnar, stable, Casey Schaufler, Linus Torvalds, Willy Tarreau On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 1:24 PM, Luck, Tony <tony.luck@intel.com> wrote: >> Those are just stories; things that happened. What you need to provide >> is *evidence* that if the community changes, things will be better, >> and unless you have a study of series of collaborative groups like the >> Linux kernel, that demonstrates that suppressing swearing has a >> positive effect in the community, I'd say all you have is an >> *opinion*. > > 1) There isn't going to be any hard evidence - this isn't a physics problem, > or even an engineering problem. It's a social problem. There are no other > collaborative groups sufficiently similar to the Linux kernel community, so there > are no studies that would be relevant. Asking for the impossible is just a > lame delaying tactic. There is evidence for social problems and their solutions, but anyway, so in fact Sarah doesn't *know* if changing that behavior would be beneficial or detrimental to the project. > 2) Sarah hasn't even asked to cut down on the swearing - so why mention > it at all? Did you even read the thread? She didn't ask, she essentially demanded[1]: > I want everyone (including Linus) to be harsh with code but gentle with people. Let's call things by their name; Sarah doesn't know if what she wants will help the project, she merely thinks so. It is merely an **opinion**, it is not backed by evidence, and it might be shared by some Linux developers, but it's still just an opinion. Linus already said he is not going to change, so that's that. Now the only thing that remains open is the discussion about better ways to work together, which probably will happen in the kernel summit, but I think it's pretty clear that an official code of conduct that forbids insulting either people or code is out of the question. Cheers. [1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.stable/58443 -- Felipe Contreras ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) 2013-07-15 22:08 ` [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) Steven Rostedt 2013-07-15 22:36 ` Sarah Sharp @ 2013-07-15 22:38 ` Linus Torvalds 2013-07-16 18:27 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] " James Bottomley 1 sibling, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Linus Torvalds @ 2013-07-15 22:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Sarah Sharp, Ingo Molnar, Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, stable, Darren Hart, ksummit-2013-discuss On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > > Can we please make this into a Kernel Summit discussion. I highly doubt > we would solve anything, but it certainly would be a fun segment to > watch :-) I think we should, because I think it's the kind of thing we really need at the KS - talking about "process". At the same time, I really don't know what the format would possibly be like for it to really work as a reasonable discussion. And I think that is important, because this kind of subject is *not* likely possible in the traditional "people sit around tables and maybe somebody has a few slides" format. A small panel discussion with a few people (fiveish?) that have very different viewpoints, along with baskets of rotten fruit set out on the tables? That could be fun. And I'm serious, although we might want to limit the size of the fruit to smaller berries ;) Sarah will bring the brownies. Linus ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) 2013-07-15 22:38 ` [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) Linus Torvalds @ 2013-07-16 18:27 ` James Bottomley 2013-07-16 21:18 ` Paul E. McKenney 2013-07-18 9:05 ` Paolo Bonzini 0 siblings, 2 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: James Bottomley @ 2013-07-16 18:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Steven Rostedt, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Ingo Molnar On Mon, 2013-07-15 at 15:38 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > > > > Can we please make this into a Kernel Summit discussion. I highly doubt > > we would solve anything, but it certainly would be a fun segment to > > watch :-) > > I think we should, because I think it's the kind of thing we really > need at the KS - talking about "process". Can you formulate the process issue to discuss? I've heard "Linus needs to yell less at people" and "the mailing lists need to be more 'professional'" neither of which seems to identify an actual process. Are we perhaps discussing guidelines for giving feedback on patches? > At the same time, I really don't know what the format would possibly > be like for it to really work as a reasonable discussion. And I think > that is important, because this kind of subject is *not* likely > possible in the traditional "people sit around tables and maybe > somebody has a few slides" format. > A small panel discussion with a few people (fiveish?) that have very > different viewpoints, along with baskets of rotten fruit set out on > the tables? That could be fun. And I'm serious, although we might want > to limit the size of the fruit to smaller berries ;) How about Lychees? They're prickly on the outside, very wet on the inside and have large stones ... But what are the viewpoints? "maintainers need to yell more"? "maintainers need to yell less"? I don't think I agree with either. I'm perfectly happy to run linux-scsi along reasonable standards of civility and try to keep the debates technical, but that's far easier to do on a low traffic list; obviously, I realise that style of argument doesn't suit everyone, so it's not a standard of behaviour I'd like to see universally imposed. In fact, I've got to say that I wouldn't like to see *any* behaviour standard imposed ... they're all basically cover for power plays (or soon get abused as power plays); the only real way to display leadership on behaviour standards is by example not by fiat. James ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) 2013-07-16 18:27 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] " James Bottomley @ 2013-07-16 21:18 ` Paul E. McKenney 2013-07-17 6:14 ` James Bottomley 2013-07-18 9:05 ` Paolo Bonzini 1 sibling, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Paul E. McKenney @ 2013-07-16 21:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: James Bottomley Cc: Linus Torvalds, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Ingo Molnar On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 10:27:09PM +0400, James Bottomley wrote: > On Mon, 2013-07-15 at 15:38 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > > > > > > Can we please make this into a Kernel Summit discussion. I highly doubt > > > we would solve anything, but it certainly would be a fun segment to > > > watch :-) > > > > I think we should, because I think it's the kind of thing we really > > need at the KS - talking about "process". > > Can you formulate the process issue to discuss? I've heard "Linus needs > to yell less at people" and "the mailing lists need to be more > 'professional'" neither of which seems to identify an actual process. > Are we perhaps discussing guidelines for giving feedback on patches? > > > At the same time, I really don't know what the format would possibly > > be like for it to really work as a reasonable discussion. And I think > > that is important, because this kind of subject is *not* likely > > possible in the traditional "people sit around tables and maybe > > somebody has a few slides" format. > > > A small panel discussion with a few people (fiveish?) that have very > > different viewpoints, along with baskets of rotten fruit set out on > > the tables? That could be fun. And I'm serious, although we might want > > to limit the size of the fruit to smaller berries ;) > > How about Lychees? They're prickly on the outside, very wet on the > inside and have large stones ... They taste good, too. > But what are the viewpoints? "maintainers need to yell more"? > "maintainers need to yell less"? I don't think I agree with either. > I'm perfectly happy to run linux-scsi along reasonable standards of > civility and try to keep the debates technical, but that's far easier to > do on a low traffic list; obviously, I realise that style of argument > doesn't suit everyone, so it's not a standard of behaviour I'd like to > see universally imposed. In fact, I've got to say that I wouldn't like > to see *any* behaviour standard imposed ... they're all basically cover > for power plays (or soon get abused as power plays); the only real way > to display leadership on behaviour standards is by example not by fiat. OK, I am stupid enough to take a stab at this... 1. Does the Linux kernel community's health depend on the occasional rant? [My guess is that we simply have no way of knowing. That said, I would be interested in hearing specific examples of open-source communities that are as doing as well as is the Linux community and that live within stricter social mores. Cue arguments about exactly what "doing well" means...] 2. Could the Linux kernel community's health be improved by banning the occasional rant? [Again, I don't believe that we have any way of knowing.] 3. Is there some reasonable way to accommodate a wide range of styles of interaction within the Linux community? [I hope that the answer is "yes", but it probably becomes impossible if you add the qualifier "that everyone is happy with".] 4. If there is some reasonable way to accommodate a wide range of styles of interaction within the Linux community, can this be done globally, or does this require that people who prefer a specific style confine themselves to portions of the community that practice that specific style? [As I grow older, I become increasingly pessimistic about the possibility of keeping everyone happy, but who knows?] For whatever it is worth... Thanx, Paul > James > > > _______________________________________________ > Ksummit-2013-discuss mailing list > Ksummit-2013-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ksummit-2013-discuss > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) 2013-07-16 21:18 ` Paul E. McKenney @ 2013-07-17 6:14 ` James Bottomley 2013-07-18 2:01 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: James Bottomley @ 2013-07-17 6:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: paulmck Cc: ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 14:18 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 10:27:09PM +0400, James Bottomley wrote: > > On Mon, 2013-07-15 at 15:38 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > Can we please make this into a Kernel Summit discussion. I highly doubt > > > > we would solve anything, but it certainly would be a fun segment to > > > > watch :-) > > > > > > I think we should, because I think it's the kind of thing we really > > > need at the KS - talking about "process". > > > > Can you formulate the process issue to discuss? I've heard "Linus needs > > to yell less at people" and "the mailing lists need to be more > > 'professional'" neither of which seems to identify an actual process. > > Are we perhaps discussing guidelines for giving feedback on patches? > > > > > At the same time, I really don't know what the format would possibly > > > be like for it to really work as a reasonable discussion. And I think > > > that is important, because this kind of subject is *not* likely > > > possible in the traditional "people sit around tables and maybe > > > somebody has a few slides" format. > > > > > A small panel discussion with a few people (fiveish?) that have very > > > different viewpoints, along with baskets of rotten fruit set out on > > > the tables? That could be fun. And I'm serious, although we might want > > > to limit the size of the fruit to smaller berries ;) > > > > How about Lychees? They're prickly on the outside, very wet on the > > inside and have large stones ... > > They taste good, too. > > > But what are the viewpoints? "maintainers need to yell more"? > > "maintainers need to yell less"? I don't think I agree with either. > > I'm perfectly happy to run linux-scsi along reasonable standards of > > civility and try to keep the debates technical, but that's far easier to > > do on a low traffic list; obviously, I realise that style of argument > > doesn't suit everyone, so it's not a standard of behaviour I'd like to > > see universally imposed. In fact, I've got to say that I wouldn't like > > to see *any* behaviour standard imposed ... they're all basically cover > > for power plays (or soon get abused as power plays); the only real way > > to display leadership on behaviour standards is by example not by fiat. > > OK, I am stupid enough to take a stab at this... > > 1. Does the Linux kernel community's health depend on the occasional > rant? [My guess is that we simply have no way of knowing. > That said, I would be interested in hearing specific examples > of open-source communities that are as doing as well as is the > Linux community and that live within stricter social mores. > Cue arguments about exactly what "doing well" means...] > > 2. Could the Linux kernel community's health be improved by banning > the occasional rant? [Again, I don't believe that we have any > way of knowing.] > > 3. Is there some reasonable way to accommodate a wide range of > styles of interaction within the Linux community? [I hope that > the answer is "yes", but it probably becomes impossible if you > add the qualifier "that everyone is happy with".] > > 4. If there is some reasonable way to accommodate a wide range > of styles of interaction within the Linux community, can this > be done globally, or does this require that people who prefer a > specific style confine themselves to portions of the community > that practice that specific style? [As I grow older, I become > increasingly pessimistic about the possibility of keeping everyone > happy, but who knows?] > > For whatever it is worth... Well, you have friends in acadaemia, perhaps there might be an interesting study here. If you consider the management style of the kernel, does it enable contributions from a broader range of people than would be tolerated in industry? Industry has a problem with what managers like to call "brilliant jerks" people who have a well recognised talent but who cannot be controlled (at least by the aforementioned managers) and become corrosive to the team (do we actually manage to make use of these people in the kernel?). They also tend to have a problem at the bottom end: those who are just about OK at their jobs; certainly not bad enough to be fired but whom they'd dearly love to replace with better workers (does the attitude in the kernel tend to discourage these types?) It's probably less relevant to the discussion at hand, but I'd be curious to see the results. Assuming they say that we do have a higher output per developer, the next study could investigate why this is ... James ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) 2013-07-17 6:14 ` James Bottomley @ 2013-07-18 2:01 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt 2013-07-19 6:03 ` Paul E. McKenney 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt @ 2013-07-18 2:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: James Bottomley Cc: paulmck, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 10:14 +0400, James Bottomley wrote: > > OK, I am stupid enough to take a stab at this... > > > > 1. Does the Linux kernel community's health depend on the occasional > > rant? [My guess is that we simply have no way of knowing. > > That said, I would be interested in hearing specific examples > > of open-source communities that are as doing as well as is the > > Linux community and that live within stricter social mores. > > Cue arguments about exactly what "doing well" means...] My little personal opinion (that nobody probably cares about :-) is that the occasional Linus rant is a good thing. It keeps people like me in check :-) More seriously, the rant when I screw up is generally deserved, and the "idea" of the possible rant (I prefer not using threat) is actually a strong motivator to get things right. Ie. It's a *very good* barrier against maintainers sliding into sloppyness. Really, it works. At least with me. It's easy to take things a bit too much for granted, especially when you maintain your own little corner of the world. Cheers, Ben. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) 2013-07-18 2:01 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt @ 2013-07-19 6:03 ` Paul E. McKenney 2013-07-19 16:58 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML H. Peter Anvin 0 siblings, 1 reply; 99+ messages in thread From: Paul E. McKenney @ 2013-07-19 6:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Cc: James Bottomley, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:01:05PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 10:14 +0400, James Bottomley wrote: > > > OK, I am stupid enough to take a stab at this... > > > > > > 1. Does the Linux kernel community's health depend on the occasional > > > rant? [My guess is that we simply have no way of knowing. > > > That said, I would be interested in hearing specific examples > > > of open-source communities that are as doing as well as is the > > > Linux community and that live within stricter social mores. > > > Cue arguments about exactly what "doing well" means...] > > My little personal opinion (that nobody probably cares about :-) is that > the occasional Linus rant is a good thing. It keeps people like me in > check :-) > > More seriously, the rant when I screw up is generally deserved, and the > "idea" of the possible rant (I prefer not using threat) is actually a > strong motivator to get things right. > > Ie. It's a *very good* barrier against maintainers sliding into > sloppyness. Really, it works. At least with me. > > It's easy to take things a bit too much for granted, especially when you > maintain your own little corner of the world. Agreed! Though I must confess that I have shifted from being mostly worried about people yelling at me to being mostly worried about my own code yelling at me. Either way, I do find that being worried about some consequence or another does help me get a better result. Thanx, Paul ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-19 6:03 ` Paul E. McKenney @ 2013-07-19 16:58 ` H. Peter Anvin 0 siblings, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: H. Peter Anvin @ 2013-07-19 16:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: paulmck Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt, James Bottomley, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Linus Torvalds, Ingo Molnar On 07/18/2013 11:03 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: >> >> Ie. It's a *very good* barrier against maintainers sliding into >> sloppyness. Really, it works. At least with me. >> >> It's easy to take things a bit too much for granted, especially when you >> maintain your own little corner of the world. > > Agreed! Though I must confess that I have shifted from being mostly > worried about people yelling at me to being mostly worried about my own > code yelling at me. Either way, I do find that being worried about some > consequence or another does help me get a better result. > Yes. Linus' little rant from last weekend has had me and the other tip maintainers look at process changes and new tooling, which we probably should have done a while ago... but it just got way too buried on the list of priorities. -hpa ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
* Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML 2013-07-16 18:27 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] " James Bottomley 2013-07-16 21:18 ` Paul E. McKenney @ 2013-07-18 9:05 ` Paolo Bonzini 1 sibling, 0 replies; 99+ messages in thread From: Paolo Bonzini @ 2013-07-18 9:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: James Bottomley Cc: Linus Torvalds, Steven Rostedt, ksummit-2013-discuss, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Darren Hart, Linux Kernel Mailing List, stable, Ingo Molnar Il 16/07/2013 20:27, James Bottomley ha scritto: > I'm perfectly happy to run linux-scsi along reasonable standards of > civility and try to keep the debates technical, but that's far easier to > do on a low traffic list; obviously, I realise that style of argument > doesn't suit everyone, so it's not a standard of behaviour I'd like to > see universally imposed. Honestly, it is not just the low traffic, it's also that most of the patches (90%?) are drivers that hardly anyone cares about. There is very little core work going on in linux-scsi, which would be a lot harder to discuss and review (making heated tones more likely to happen). This is not what happens in other areas (net for example, just to remain within drivers/). > In fact, I've got to say that I wouldn't like > to see *any* behaviour standard imposed ... they're all basically cover > for power plays (or soon get abused as power plays); the only real way > to display leadership on behaviour standards is by example not by fiat. This I completely agree with, and you set a great example of civility. Paolo ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 99+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-07-26 5:22 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 99+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2013-07-17 20:07 [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML George Spelvin -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below -- 2013-07-15 15:52 [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review Sarah Sharp 2013-07-15 17:08 ` Linus Torvalds 2013-07-15 17:46 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-15 17:50 ` Linus Torvalds 2013-07-15 18:04 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-15 18:17 ` Linus Torvalds 2013-07-15 18:46 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-15 19:07 ` Linus Torvalds 2013-07-15 19:53 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-15 20:41 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-15 21:50 ` Linus Torvalds 2013-07-15 22:08 ` [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) Steven Rostedt 2013-07-15 22:36 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-15 23:49 ` Darren Hart 2013-07-16 2:43 ` [ATTEND] How to act on LKML Chris Ball 2013-07-16 3:06 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-16 3:36 ` H. Peter Anvin 2013-07-16 15:49 ` Stefano Stabellini 2013-07-16 16:16 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-16 16:58 ` Stefano Stabellini 2013-07-16 19:31 ` H. Peter Anvin 2013-07-17 9:17 ` Stefano Stabellini 2013-07-17 14:01 ` Felipe Contreras 2013-07-17 14:40 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-17 15:12 ` Felipe Contreras 2013-07-19 12:08 ` Ingo Molnar 2013-07-19 18:42 ` Felipe Contreras 2013-07-19 18:56 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-19 20:33 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] " James Bottomley 2013-07-19 20:43 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-19 23:46 ` NeilBrown 2013-07-19 20:03 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2013-07-20 12:35 ` Felipe Contreras 2013-07-21 1:02 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] " Daniel Phillips 2013-07-21 1:02 ` Daniel Phillips 2013-07-24 0:51 ` Felipe Contreras 2013-07-24 0:51 ` Felipe Contreras 2013-07-24 1:26 ` James Bottomley 2013-07-24 1:26 ` James Bottomley 2013-07-24 1:38 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-24 1:38 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-24 16:23 ` James Bottomley 2013-07-24 16:23 ` James Bottomley 2013-07-24 16:50 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-24 16:50 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-24 1:48 ` Paul Gortmaker 2013-07-24 1:48 ` Paul Gortmaker 2013-07-24 1:53 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-24 1:53 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-24 8:57 ` Daniel Phillips 2013-07-24 8:57 ` Daniel Phillips 2013-07-25 14:00 ` Felipe Contreras 2013-07-25 14:00 ` Felipe Contreras 2013-07-25 14:33 ` Willy Tarreau 2013-07-25 14:33 ` Willy Tarreau 2013-07-25 14:49 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-25 14:49 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-25 22:51 ` Daniel Phillips 2013-07-25 22:51 ` Daniel Phillips 2013-07-25 23:30 ` Willy Tarreau 2013-07-25 23:30 ` Willy Tarreau 2013-07-25 23:44 ` Daniel Phillips 2013-07-25 23:44 ` Daniel Phillips 2013-07-26 5:22 ` Willy Tarreau 2013-07-26 5:22 ` Willy Tarreau 2013-07-20 17:04 ` Ben Hutchings 2013-07-21 13:22 ` Ric Wheeler 2013-07-23 1:26 ` Li Zefan 2013-07-23 1:39 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-23 2:04 ` Li Zefan 2013-07-17 22:02 ` Guenter Roeck 2013-07-17 22:49 ` Randy Dunlap 2013-07-17 23:08 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] " Paul E. McKenney 2013-07-17 23:19 ` Guenter Roeck 2013-07-18 0:57 ` Paul E. McKenney 2013-07-17 8:04 ` Dan Carpenter 2013-07-16 7:32 ` [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) David Lang 2013-07-16 9:14 ` Olivier Galibert 2013-07-16 21:12 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-16 21:27 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] " Theodore Ts'o 2013-07-16 22:43 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-16 22:54 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-16 23:12 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-16 23:31 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML Ric Wheeler 2013-07-16 23:53 ` Myklebust, Trond 2013-07-16 23:53 ` Myklebust, Trond 2013-07-17 1:21 ` Ric Wheeler 2013-07-17 1:21 ` Ric Wheeler 2013-07-17 7:36 ` CAI Qian 2013-07-17 14:48 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-17 15:09 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-17 17:00 ` Stefano Stabellini 2013-07-17 17:15 ` Felipe Contreras 2013-07-17 17:56 ` Stefano Stabellini 2013-07-17 18:05 ` Felipe Contreras 2013-07-17 18:42 ` Al Viro 2013-07-17 22:24 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-18 0:29 ` Felipe Contreras 2013-07-18 4:59 ` Al Viro 2013-07-17 17:28 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-17 19:02 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-17 17:57 ` Al Viro 2013-07-17 17:52 ` Willy Tarreau 2013-07-17 18:51 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-17 19:04 ` David Lang 2013-07-17 19:29 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-17 20:18 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2013-07-19 10:54 ` Ingo Molnar 2013-07-17 19:40 ` Willy Tarreau 2013-07-17 22:38 ` David Woodhouse 2013-07-17 23:05 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra 2013-07-18 2:40 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt 2013-07-18 3:00 ` CAI Qian 2013-07-16 23:38 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) Steven Rostedt 2013-07-17 14:01 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML Paul Gortmaker 2013-07-17 0:32 ` Jeff Liu 2013-07-17 0:51 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-17 1:23 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-17 5:51 ` Willy Tarreau 2013-07-17 12:21 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-17 12:30 ` Ricardo Ferreira 2013-07-17 13:03 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-17 13:10 ` Willy Tarreau 2013-07-17 15:02 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-17 15:16 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-17 22:55 ` Guenter Roeck 2013-07-17 9:15 ` Jeff Liu 2013-07-17 10:58 ` James Bottomley 2013-07-17 11:13 ` Jeff Liu 2013-07-16 23:01 ` Randy Dunlap 2013-07-16 23:50 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) Theodore Ts'o 2013-07-17 2:18 ` Ben Hutchings 2013-07-17 3:02 ` Linus Torvalds 2013-07-17 3:16 ` Ben Hutchings 2013-07-17 4:48 ` Linus Torvalds 2013-07-17 5:22 ` Darren Hart 2013-07-17 5:32 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-17 17:41 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML Randy Dunlap 2013-07-17 17:59 ` Steven Rostedt 2013-07-16 22:18 ` [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) Willy Tarreau 2013-07-16 22:39 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-16 23:46 ` [ATTEND] How to act on LKML Casey Schaufler 2013-07-17 1:02 ` Sarah Sharp 2013-07-17 14:27 ` Felipe Contreras 2013-07-17 18:24 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] " Luck, Tony 2013-07-17 18:24 ` Luck, Tony 2013-07-17 18:46 ` Felipe Contreras 2013-07-17 18:46 ` Felipe Contreras 2013-07-15 22:38 ` [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) Linus Torvalds 2013-07-16 18:27 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] " James Bottomley 2013-07-16 21:18 ` Paul E. McKenney 2013-07-17 6:14 ` James Bottomley 2013-07-18 2:01 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt 2013-07-19 6:03 ` Paul E. McKenney 2013-07-19 16:58 ` [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML H. Peter Anvin 2013-07-18 9:05 ` Paolo Bonzini
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.