From: NeilBrown <neil@brown.name> To: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Cc: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org, Mishi Choudhary <mishi@linux.com>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] Call to Action Re: [PATCH 0/7] Code of Conduct: Fix some wording, and add an interpretation document Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2018 15:25:08 +1100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <87r2gh70ij.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20181023033130.GQ32577@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3815 bytes --] On Tue, Oct 23 2018, Al Viro wrote: > On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 07:26:06AM +1100, NeilBrown wrote: > >> Currently if a maintainer is rude to you, there is no where else that >> you can go and *that* is why it hurts. It isn't the abuse so much as >> the powerlessness associated with it. If you can (metaphorically) say >> to that maintainer "I don't care about your toilet mouth, you've just >> given me the right to take my petition to caesar" - then the emotional >> response will be quite different to pain. > > Bollocks. First of all, you *always* can take patches to Linus, even if > maintainer is being the sodding Miss Manners. Always could. What you > can't (and shouldn't be able to) is to _force_ a piece of shit patch > (pardon the toilet mouth) into the tree on the grounds of maintainer having > been "rude" to your patch. Yes, you could, and you can. But if it was Linus who was behaving inappropriately, where did you go then? This is why I think whatever "code" we have should be overtly a statement Linus makes about his behaviour, in the first instance. And of course a bad patch should be rejected. In many cases a bad patch can then be improved. If the maintainer responds badly to your first (bad) patch, it can be very hard to try again - once bitten twice shy, as they say. The point of being able to circumvent a maintainer is to be able to get relevant rational review, instead of emotional attacks. > > Again, you can and always could appeal to Linus if your patches are wrongly > rejected, in your opinion. You'd better have good evidence supporting the > "wrongly" bit in that case, but the "right to petition" model implies that > anyway. I wonder how many people know about this right-to-petition, or use it. Maybe it should be stated in the "Code of conduct". > > If you are talking about the situations when "rude" maintainer makes insufferable > requests to one's precious patches (e.g. demonstrates his or her mental inferiority > by admitting that they are unable to follow contributor's 0.5KLoC of spaghetty in a > single function and has an unspeakable gall to demand to clean it up - instead of > passing that task upon the interns, as they ought to[1])... sure, that would be > something new. Would you care to be the person charged with dealing with such... > valuable contributors? And how good is the coverage of psychiatric treatments > offered by your medical insurance? > > [1] no, I'm not making it up > >> If Linus is not true to his new-found sensitivity, we might need someone >> (Greg?) to be a co-maintainer, able to accept patches when Linus has a >> relapse. It might be good form to create this channel anyway, but I >> doubt it would be needed in practice. >> >> So there you have it. The "Code" is upside down. >> We need documents which: >> - curtail the power of the strong, starting with Linus >> - are adopted willingly by individuals, not imposed on the community. >> - provide alternate routes for patch-flow, so that no-one has ultimate >> power. > > Really? The ultimate power being to say "No" to a patch, and nobody should > have such? Are you fucking serious? I have noticed of late a tendency in all sorts of different people to hear/read a statement from someone they know, interpret it a particular way, be surprised about that interpretation, and persist with believing that interpretation anyway, rather than realizing that the most likely explanation is a communication failure, and asking for clarification. The "ultimate power" is the ability to say "no" to a patch, *with no opportunity for review*. Two people together having that ultimate power is a totally different thing to one person having it alone. Thanks NeilBrown [-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 832 bytes --]
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: NeilBrown <neil@brown.name> To: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Cc: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>, ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org, Mishi Choudhary <mishi@linux.com> Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] Call to Action Re: [PATCH 0/7] Code of Conduct: Fix some wording, and add an interpretation document Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2018 15:25:08 +1100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <87r2gh70ij.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20181023033130.GQ32577@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3815 bytes --] On Tue, Oct 23 2018, Al Viro wrote: > On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 07:26:06AM +1100, NeilBrown wrote: > >> Currently if a maintainer is rude to you, there is no where else that >> you can go and *that* is why it hurts. It isn't the abuse so much as >> the powerlessness associated with it. If you can (metaphorically) say >> to that maintainer "I don't care about your toilet mouth, you've just >> given me the right to take my petition to caesar" - then the emotional >> response will be quite different to pain. > > Bollocks. First of all, you *always* can take patches to Linus, even if > maintainer is being the sodding Miss Manners. Always could. What you > can't (and shouldn't be able to) is to _force_ a piece of shit patch > (pardon the toilet mouth) into the tree on the grounds of maintainer having > been "rude" to your patch. Yes, you could, and you can. But if it was Linus who was behaving inappropriately, where did you go then? This is why I think whatever "code" we have should be overtly a statement Linus makes about his behaviour, in the first instance. And of course a bad patch should be rejected. In many cases a bad patch can then be improved. If the maintainer responds badly to your first (bad) patch, it can be very hard to try again - once bitten twice shy, as they say. The point of being able to circumvent a maintainer is to be able to get relevant rational review, instead of emotional attacks. > > Again, you can and always could appeal to Linus if your patches are wrongly > rejected, in your opinion. You'd better have good evidence supporting the > "wrongly" bit in that case, but the "right to petition" model implies that > anyway. I wonder how many people know about this right-to-petition, or use it. Maybe it should be stated in the "Code of conduct". > > If you are talking about the situations when "rude" maintainer makes insufferable > requests to one's precious patches (e.g. demonstrates his or her mental inferiority > by admitting that they are unable to follow contributor's 0.5KLoC of spaghetty in a > single function and has an unspeakable gall to demand to clean it up - instead of > passing that task upon the interns, as they ought to[1])... sure, that would be > something new. Would you care to be the person charged with dealing with such... > valuable contributors? And how good is the coverage of psychiatric treatments > offered by your medical insurance? > > [1] no, I'm not making it up > >> If Linus is not true to his new-found sensitivity, we might need someone >> (Greg?) to be a co-maintainer, able to accept patches when Linus has a >> relapse. It might be good form to create this channel anyway, but I >> doubt it would be needed in practice. >> >> So there you have it. The "Code" is upside down. >> We need documents which: >> - curtail the power of the strong, starting with Linus >> - are adopted willingly by individuals, not imposed on the community. >> - provide alternate routes for patch-flow, so that no-one has ultimate >> power. > > Really? The ultimate power being to say "No" to a patch, and nobody should > have such? Are you fucking serious? I have noticed of late a tendency in all sorts of different people to hear/read a statement from someone they know, interpret it a particular way, be surprised about that interpretation, and persist with believing that interpretation anyway, rather than realizing that the most likely explanation is a communication failure, and asking for clarification. The "ultimate power" is the ability to say "no" to a patch, *with no opportunity for review*. Two people together having that ultimate power is a totally different thing to one person having it alone. Thanks NeilBrown [-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 832 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-23 4:25 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 177+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2018-10-20 13:49 [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH 0/7] Code of Conduct: Fix some wording, and add an interpretation document Greg Kroah-Hartman 2018-10-20 13:49 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman 2018-10-20 13:49 ` [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH 1/7] Code of conduct: Fix wording around maintainers enforcing the code of conduct Greg Kroah-Hartman 2018-10-20 13:49 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman 2018-10-20 13:50 ` [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH 2/7] Code of Conduct Interpretation: Add document explaining how the Code of Conduct is to be interpreted Greg Kroah-Hartman 2018-10-20 13:50 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman 2018-10-20 13:50 ` [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH 3/7] Code of Conduct Interpretation: Properly reference the TAB correctly Greg Kroah-Hartman 2018-10-20 13:50 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman 2018-10-20 13:50 ` [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH 4/7] Code of Conduct: Provide links between the two documents Greg Kroah-Hartman 2018-10-20 13:50 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman 2018-10-20 13:50 ` [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH 5/7] Code of Conduct Interpretation: Put in the proper URL for the committee Greg Kroah-Hartman 2018-10-20 13:50 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman 2018-10-20 19:01 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " Geert Uytterhoeven 2018-10-20 19:01 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2018-10-21 7:18 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " Greg KH 2018-10-21 7:18 ` Greg KH 2018-10-20 13:51 ` [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH 6/7] Code of Conduct: Change the contact email address Greg Kroah-Hartman 2018-10-20 13:51 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman 2018-10-20 18:28 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " Alan Cox 2018-10-20 18:28 ` Alan Cox 2018-10-20 18:45 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " Trond Myklebust 2018-10-20 18:45 ` Trond Myklebust 2018-10-20 19:14 ` jonsmirl 2018-10-20 19:14 ` jonsmirl 2018-10-21 8:27 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 2018-10-21 8:27 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 2018-10-21 9:23 ` Greg KH 2018-10-21 9:23 ` Greg KH 2018-10-20 19:24 ` Tim.Bird 2018-10-20 19:24 ` Tim.Bird 2018-10-20 20:07 ` Trond Myklebust 2018-10-20 20:07 ` Trond Myklebust 2018-10-21 0:13 ` Alan Cox 2018-10-21 0:13 ` Alan Cox 2018-10-21 6:19 ` Thomas Gleixner 2018-10-21 6:19 ` Thomas Gleixner 2018-10-20 20:13 ` James Bottomley 2018-10-20 20:13 ` James Bottomley 2018-10-20 13:51 ` [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH 7/7] MAINTAINERS: Add an entry for the code of conduct Greg Kroah-Hartman 2018-10-20 13:51 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman 2018-10-21 21:20 ` [Ksummit-discuss] Call to Action Re: [PATCH 0/7] Code of Conduct: Fix some wording, and add an interpretation document NeilBrown 2018-10-21 21:20 ` NeilBrown 2018-10-21 22:26 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " Josh Triplett 2018-10-21 22:26 ` Josh Triplett 2018-10-21 23:37 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 2018-10-21 23:37 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 2018-10-23 1:44 ` NeilBrown 2018-10-22 20:26 ` NeilBrown 2018-10-22 20:26 ` NeilBrown 2018-10-22 22:46 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 2018-10-22 22:46 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 2018-10-23 1:31 ` NeilBrown 2018-10-23 1:31 ` NeilBrown 2018-10-23 6:26 ` Dan Carpenter 2018-10-23 6:40 ` Al Viro 2018-10-23 6:40 ` Al Viro 2018-10-23 6:46 ` Dan Carpenter 2018-10-23 6:46 ` Dan Carpenter 2018-10-23 3:31 ` Al Viro 2018-10-23 3:31 ` Al Viro 2018-10-23 4:25 ` NeilBrown [this message] 2018-10-23 4:25 ` NeilBrown 2018-10-23 4:52 ` Al Viro 2018-10-23 4:52 ` Al Viro 2018-10-23 5:28 ` NeilBrown 2018-10-23 5:28 ` NeilBrown 2018-10-23 6:00 ` Al Viro 2018-10-23 6:00 ` Al Viro 2018-10-23 20:45 ` NeilBrown 2018-10-23 20:45 ` NeilBrown 2018-10-23 8:11 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 2018-10-23 8:11 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 2018-10-23 14:22 ` Rainer Fiebig 2018-10-23 14:22 ` Rainer Fiebig 2018-10-23 15:43 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 2018-10-23 15:43 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 2018-10-23 17:51 ` Rainer Fiebig 2018-10-23 21:14 ` NeilBrown 2018-10-23 21:14 ` NeilBrown 2018-10-24 12:16 ` Josh Triplett 2018-10-24 12:16 ` Josh Triplett 2018-10-25 21:14 ` NeilBrown 2018-10-25 21:14 ` NeilBrown 2018-10-27 1:10 ` Josh Triplett 2018-10-27 1:10 ` Josh Triplett 2018-10-28 21:48 ` NeilBrown 2018-10-28 21:48 ` NeilBrown 2018-11-01 16:45 ` Paul E. McKenney 2018-11-01 16:45 ` Paul E. McKenney 2018-11-01 21:11 ` Josh Triplett 2018-11-01 21:11 ` Josh Triplett 2018-11-02 13:13 ` Paul E. McKenney 2018-11-02 13:13 ` Paul E. McKenney 2018-11-01 21:50 ` NeilBrown 2018-11-02 13:33 ` Paul E. McKenney 2018-11-02 13:33 ` Paul E. McKenney 2018-11-03 8:36 ` NeilBrown 2018-11-03 8:36 ` NeilBrown 2018-11-03 17:37 ` Paul E. McKenney 2018-11-03 17:37 ` Paul E. McKenney 2018-11-03 21:06 ` NeilBrown 2018-11-03 21:06 ` NeilBrown 2018-11-03 22:23 ` Paul E. McKenney 2018-11-03 22:23 ` Paul E. McKenney 2018-11-02 13:52 ` James Bottomley 2018-11-03 9:19 ` Eric S. Raymond 2018-11-04 10:35 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2018-11-04 10:35 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2018-10-21 22:33 ` Joe Perches 2018-10-21 22:33 ` Joe Perches 2018-10-21 22:37 ` Randy Dunlap 2018-10-21 22:37 ` Randy Dunlap 2018-10-22 9:09 ` Rainer Fiebig 2018-10-22 9:09 ` Rainer Fiebig 2018-10-22 11:02 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " James Bottomley 2018-10-22 11:02 ` James Bottomley 2018-10-24 8:49 ` Laura Abbott 2018-10-24 8:49 ` Laura Abbott 2018-10-25 7:56 ` The linux devs can rescind their license grant visionsofalice 2018-10-25 8:19 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " Greg Kroah-Hartman 2018-10-25 8:19 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman 2018-10-25 19:39 ` Eric S. Raymond 2018-10-25 20:47 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " Theodore Y. Ts'o 2018-10-25 20:47 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 2018-10-25 21:41 ` Eric S. Raymond 2018-10-25 22:12 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " NeilBrown 2018-10-25 22:12 ` NeilBrown 2018-10-25 22:38 ` Eric S. Raymond 2018-10-25 22:52 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " NeilBrown 2018-10-25 22:52 ` NeilBrown 2018-11-04 10:47 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " Geert Uytterhoeven 2018-11-04 10:47 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2018-10-25 23:06 ` Al Viro 2018-10-25 23:06 ` Al Viro 2018-10-26 2:28 ` Eric S. Raymond 2018-10-26 5:49 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " Al Viro 2018-10-26 5:49 ` Al Viro 2018-10-27 6:52 ` visionsofalice 2018-10-27 7:32 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " Al Viro 2018-10-27 7:32 ` Al Viro 2018-10-27 16:18 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " Tim.Bird 2018-10-27 16:18 ` Tim.Bird 2018-10-27 22:09 ` Jiri Kosina 2018-10-27 22:09 ` Jiri Kosina [not found] ` <CAK2MWOtNUTjWy5pTcGco5DNurqNCc=9CfDJ-Ko-K+6HDC55ikg@mail.gmail.com> 2018-10-27 23:07 ` Eric S. Raymond 2018-10-27 23:40 ` Al Viro 2018-10-27 23:40 ` Al Viro 2018-10-28 21:13 ` NeilBrown 2018-10-28 21:13 ` NeilBrown 2018-10-25 23:32 ` Iván Chavero 2018-10-26 13:15 ` Eben Moglen 2018-10-26 15:50 ` Eric S. Raymond 2018-10-26 15:53 ` Eben Moglen 2018-10-26 17:32 ` visionsofalice 2018-10-26 18:31 ` Eben Moglen 2018-10-27 7:12 ` visionsofalice 2018-12-18 18:53 ` The linux devs can rescind their license grant. - Analysis published? visionsofalice 2018-10-26 10:34 ` The linux devs can rescind their license grant visionsofalice 2018-10-29 22:31 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " Bradley M. Kuhn 2018-10-29 22:31 ` Bradley M. Kuhn 2018-12-18 19:17 ` visionsofalice 2018-10-27 5:04 ` The linux devs can rescind their license grant. - Additional restrictive terms visionsofalice 2018-12-18 20:55 ` The CoC regime is a License violation " visionsofalice 2018-12-19 1:17 ` visionsofalice 2018-12-23 16:05 ` visionsofalice 2018-10-25 22:02 ` [Ksummit-discuss] Call to Action Re: [PATCH 0/7] Code of Conduct: Fix some wording, and add an interpretation document NeilBrown 2018-10-25 22:02 ` NeilBrown 2018-10-25 8:06 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " Pavel Machek 2018-10-25 8:06 ` Pavel Machek 2018-10-25 11:20 ` Rainer Fiebig 2018-10-25 22:18 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " NeilBrown 2018-10-25 22:18 ` NeilBrown 2018-10-26 8:33 ` Rainer Fiebig 2018-10-26 22:40 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " NeilBrown 2018-10-26 22:40 ` NeilBrown 2018-10-27 11:49 ` Rainer Fiebig 2018-10-21 23:36 ` Eric S. Raymond
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=87r2gh70ij.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name \ --to=neil@brown.name \ --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \ --cc=ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=mishi@linux.com \ --cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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.