Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
Hi, just a short comment. I think, this snippet shows the key point in this argument: At 15.07.2013 21:53 CEST +02:00 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. > Sarah introduced the term "abuse" like in the first paragraph into the discussion while complaining about the tone in some statements. It's her claim, that all non-"polite" statements are an "abuse". In the second paragraph, then she argues that "abuse" should be prevented, using some definition of "abuse". The claim that the unwanted kind of statements are really a kind of abuse is still unfounded. She could have proven it -- eg by using its/her/a definition -- but she only used this definition as foundation to dislike the non-"polite" statements. Imho this is just circular reasoning [1] > (I) dislike -> (I regard as) impolite -> kind of abuse -> to be disliked (by > all) and so has no substance up to now. Maybe, logical package management would have recognized this unmet dependency ;) Disclaimer: I dont' question the implication "abuse -> to be disliked". Flo [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
Hi, just a short comment. I think, this snippet shows the key point in this argument: At 15.07.2013 21:53 CEST +02:00 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. Sarah introduced the term abuse like in the first paragraph into the discussion while complaining about the tone in some statements. It's her claim, that all non-polite statements are an abuse. In the second paragraph, then she argues that abuse should be prevented, using some definition of abuse. The claim that the unwanted kind of statements are really a kind of abuse is still unfounded. She could have proven it -- eg by using its/her/a definition -- but she only used this definition as foundation to dislike the non-polite statements. Imho this is just circular reasoning [1] (I) dislike - (I regard as) impolite - kind of abuse - to be disliked (by all) and so has no substance up to now. Maybe, logical package management would have recognized this unmet dependency ;) Disclaimer: I dont' question the implication abuse - to be disliked. Flo [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
Hi Sarah, kinda reminds me of... baboons... its natural among mammals i guess... Why hierarchy creates a destructive force within the human psyche (by dr. Robert Sapolsky) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4UMyTnlaMY=share On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 11:52 PM, Sarah Sharp wrote: > On Fri, 12 Jul 2013 18:17:08 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> * Linus Torvalds wrote: >> >> > On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Steven Rostedt >> > 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 > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
Hi Sarah, kinda reminds me of... baboons... its natural among mammals i guess... Why hierarchy creates a destructive force within the human psyche (by dr. Robert Sapolsky) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4UMyTnlaMYfeature=share On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 11:52 PM, Sarah Sharp sarah.a.sh...@linux.intel.com wrote: On Fri, 12 Jul 2013 18:17:08 +0200, Ingo Molnar mi...@kernel.org wrote: * Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote: On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Steven Rostedt rost...@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 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
Mike, I do want to partially apologize to Sarah for my first email. That was really much tongue in cheek to express what happens when things get too polite and professional and hope she wasn't too offended. I saw Sarah's last post http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg471360.html and see she's changed her tune a bit which is a lot more agreeable to me and I suspect others. However I still thinks she's a little bit too pendantic to the point of being really annoying and seeming like she's memorized the book of conduct quoting things like " The book "No Assholes Rule" cites research that shows only 1% of subordinates bully their superiors" and is ready to throw it in peoples faces if they infringe on the rules. Those rules are way too long to follow. Why can't you guys just trust your insticts and if you are relaly worried about Linus -- just make it a rule "If anybody thinks X is acting as a jerk at this very moment -- call it out" Honestly do yo guys even have time to read 20 pages of what is and ISN'T and insult. I also suspect the public viewers aren't going to be looking up at an Org Chart "Hmm let me check if Linus is allowed to insult this guy :) " When you are at the party since she's probably going to miss this note because its on a dead thread if you could convey my sentiments. Thanks, Regina -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
RE: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
> Which means you're likely not invited to the annual mud-wrestling and toga party where this topic has been scheduled for further discussion. > This thread and its offspring have been declared dead on LKML, we're in kernel development mode again. > -Mike That's okay. Just wanted to express my comments. Regina -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Mon, 2013-07-22 at 21:42 -0400, Regina Obe wrote: > Linus, > I want to start off by saying, though I'm mostly a windows developer, Which means you're likely not invited to the annual mud-wrestling and toga party where this topic has been scheduled for further discussion. This thread and its offspring have been declared dead on LKML, we're in kernel development mode again. -Mike -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
I wanted to take Sarah up on her offer to pay my respects for the great work she is doing to bring civility to the LKLM community as detailed in http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel=137390362508794 Linus, I want to start off by saying, though I'm mostly a windows developer, I've gained a whole new level of appreciation for you, with the very professional way you have handled Sarah's pleas for civility and professionalism. I hope you don't think of "professionalism" and "civility" as dirty words, because I certainly did not mean it that way. I have tried to express my own feelings in the most professional and civil way I could muster in this article http://www.postgresonline.com/journal/archives/311-In-defense-of-being-blunt-and-to-the-point.html . I want to first say that while Sarah does not speak for me, and I suspect she does not speak for all minorities, females, and the poor down-trodden developers in your ranks that have had their feelings torn apart by your less than kind words, I do still appreciate her great efforts to bring civility to LKML. You go girl, Sarah -- keep fighting the good fight, we are with you - both men and women. I do hope your efforts do not make it difficult for women to distinguish criticism from platitudes. Perhaps some day, Sarah, your dream will come true and you can be a top tier committer as you stated in your moving up the career rank comment. http://sarah.thesharps.us/2013/07/15/no-more-verbal-abuse/#comments You won't even have to work for it, because Linus will be so scared of you he'll just hand it over to you and accept any patch you give him. Please don't take my above statement as an accusation that that is what you are doing. That is not at all what I meant. I just meant to say that if you wanted to exercise that option, you are in a good position to. Consider it just my suggested career advice just like the wonderful career advice you have given to other women in your blog http://sarah.thesharps.us/2013/06/23/dont-be-a-jerk/ . I do have one final request. If you do succeed in your quest for civility and professionalism, please do try to keep the office politics where they belong, in the office. I'd still like to think there is still some semblance of openness after you are done with your restructuring. I want to thank you one more time for the great work you have done bringing this GREAT INJUSTICE to our attention. I certainly would not have discovered it without all the great accolades you have won for this from both men and women http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-07/22/sarah-sharp . You must be some kind of wonder woman. I am so very very appreciative that there is a woman out there willing to stand up to Linus verbal abuse and fight for those who are too afraid to stand up for themselves. You are just SO *fucking* cool. YOU GO GIRL SARAH. Thanks, Regina Obe -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] Maybe it's time to shut this thread down (Was: Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review)
On 07/22/2013 09:02 PM, Luck, Tony wrote: > Some thoughts on the format of the discussion at KS: > > ... > 5) Volunteers are under-represented at Kernel Summit Volunteers are the "dark matter" of Linux Kernel contribution. They are not the "usual suspects" who nearly all have full time jobs now, allowing them the time investment to raise their profile sufficiently to gain a place at the KS round table. They may not be very vocal. They are most probably the first to depart for more pleasant pastures when the interaction becomes less than fun. In part because they do not have an employer who requires them to stay engaged no matter what. How do we represent the viewpoint of volunteers? Which for many of us is a former life, the memory of which may be starting to fade. Regards, Daniel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
RE: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] Maybe it's time to shut this thread down (Was: Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review)
On 07/18/2013 03:54 PM, Sarah Sharp wrote: > Let's shift this discussion away from the terms "abuse" and > "professionalism" to "respect" and "civility". And Daniel Philips replied: > Brilliant, and +1 for a session at KS. In the mean time, why don't we > all try to demonstrate the real meaning of respect and civility, by > practising it henceforth on LKML +1 from me too. Using the right terms will help us have a discussion that focusses on the issues that matter - and avoid getting side-tracked by things that don't. Some thoughts on the format of the discussion at KS: 1) Keep it real We could come up with hypothetical scenarios on what things people *might* say, and how you *might* react and talk for days. Let's stick to things that actually happened. (people's feelings/emotions on seeing specific posts count as "actually happened" for this - even if they didn't post a reply ... perhaps especially if they didn't post). 2) Keep it personal An extension of keeping it real - none of us represents the thoughts and opinions of *every* other developer with whom we share some attribute. Sarah doesn't speak for all young cool programmers any more than I speak for all old uncool ones :-). So stick to your own stories, or those of specific people that can't be at KS but ask for their tales to be told. [Not sure how well I expressed this one ... I'm trying to avoid the issue where someone gets fired up with indignation on behalf of someone else ... who isn't actually bothered by whatever happened]. 3) Don't bring up ancient history From the discussions on this, it looks like many people believe that things are better than they were just a few years ago. Unless someone has the desire to do some month-by-month survey and disproves this perception - let's pretend we have a one or two year statute of limitations and not keep feuds going for (internet) generations. 4) Perfect is the enemy of good Or "You can't please all of the people all of the time". No matter what we do there will still be some unhappy people. Life is like that. But we can almost certainly make more of the people happier for most of the time. So our goal isn't to solve every possible problem (we need to save some topics for future KS :-) we just want to make things better than they are, while still allowing for criticism of code. -Tony -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Maybe it's time to shut this thread down (Was: Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review)
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 02:44:21PM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 04:03:24PM -0400, Kurt H Maier wrote: > > Come to KS! You're more than welcome to discuss this with us there. > Thanks for the invitation, but those events don't fit into my schedule. I hope in my absence you'll find away to empower yourself without disenfranchising others or reinforcing harmful cis-gender stereotypes. I wish you a constructive summit! khm -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Maybe it's time to shut this thread down (Was: Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review)
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 02:44:21PM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 04:03:24PM -0400, Kurt H Maier wrote: Come to KS! You're more than welcome to discuss this with us there. Thanks for the invitation, but those events don't fit into my schedule. I hope in my absence you'll find away to empower yourself without disenfranchising others or reinforcing harmful cis-gender stereotypes. I wish you a constructive summit! khm -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
RE: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] Maybe it's time to shut this thread down (Was: Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review)
On 07/18/2013 03:54 PM, Sarah Sharp wrote: Let's shift this discussion away from the terms abuse and professionalism to respect and civility. And Daniel Philips replied: Brilliant, and +1 for a session at KS. In the mean time, why don't we all try to demonstrate the real meaning of respect and civility, by practising it henceforth on LKML +1 from me too. Using the right terms will help us have a discussion that focusses on the issues that matter - and avoid getting side-tracked by things that don't. Some thoughts on the format of the discussion at KS: 1) Keep it real We could come up with hypothetical scenarios on what things people *might* say, and how you *might* react and talk for days. Let's stick to things that actually happened. (people's feelings/emotions on seeing specific posts count as actually happened for this - even if they didn't post a reply ... perhaps especially if they didn't post). 2) Keep it personal An extension of keeping it real - none of us represents the thoughts and opinions of *every* other developer with whom we share some attribute. Sarah doesn't speak for all young cool programmers any more than I speak for all old uncool ones :-). So stick to your own stories, or those of specific people that can't be at KS but ask for their tales to be told. [Not sure how well I expressed this one ... I'm trying to avoid the issue where someone gets fired up with indignation on behalf of someone else ... who isn't actually bothered by whatever happened]. 3) Don't bring up ancient history From the discussions on this, it looks like many people believe that things are better than they were just a few years ago. Unless someone has the desire to do some month-by-month survey and disproves this perception - let's pretend we have a one or two year statute of limitations and not keep feuds going for (internet) generations. 4) Perfect is the enemy of good Or You can't please all of the people all of the time. No matter what we do there will still be some unhappy people. Life is like that. But we can almost certainly make more of the people happier for most of the time. So our goal isn't to solve every possible problem (we need to save some topics for future KS :-) we just want to make things better than they are, while still allowing for criticism of code. -Tony -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] Maybe it's time to shut this thread down (Was: Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review)
On 07/22/2013 09:02 PM, Luck, Tony wrote: Some thoughts on the format of the discussion at KS: ... 5) Volunteers are under-represented at Kernel Summit Volunteers are the dark matter of Linux Kernel contribution. They are not the usual suspects who nearly all have full time jobs now, allowing them the time investment to raise their profile sufficiently to gain a place at the KS round table. They may not be very vocal. They are most probably the first to depart for more pleasant pastures when the interaction becomes less than fun. In part because they do not have an employer who requires them to stay engaged no matter what. How do we represent the viewpoint of volunteers? Which for many of us is a former life, the memory of which may be starting to fade. Regards, Daniel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
I wanted to take Sarah up on her offer to pay my respects for the great work she is doing to bring civility to the LKLM community as detailed in http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernelm=137390362508794 Linus, I want to start off by saying, though I'm mostly a windows developer, I've gained a whole new level of appreciation for you, with the very professional way you have handled Sarah's pleas for civility and professionalism. I hope you don't think of professionalism and civility as dirty words, because I certainly did not mean it that way. I have tried to express my own feelings in the most professional and civil way I could muster in this article http://www.postgresonline.com/journal/archives/311-In-defense-of-being-blunt-and-to-the-point.html . I want to first say that while Sarah does not speak for me, and I suspect she does not speak for all minorities, females, and the poor down-trodden developers in your ranks that have had their feelings torn apart by your less than kind words, I do still appreciate her great efforts to bring civility to LKML. You go girl, Sarah -- keep fighting the good fight, we are with you - both men and women. I do hope your efforts do not make it difficult for women to distinguish criticism from platitudes. Perhaps some day, Sarah, your dream will come true and you can be a top tier committer as you stated in your moving up the career rank comment. http://sarah.thesharps.us/2013/07/15/no-more-verbal-abuse/#comments You won't even have to work for it, because Linus will be so scared of you he'll just hand it over to you and accept any patch you give him. Please don't take my above statement as an accusation that that is what you are doing. That is not at all what I meant. I just meant to say that if you wanted to exercise that option, you are in a good position to. Consider it just my suggested career advice just like the wonderful career advice you have given to other women in your blog http://sarah.thesharps.us/2013/06/23/dont-be-a-jerk/ . I do have one final request. If you do succeed in your quest for civility and professionalism, please do try to keep the office politics where they belong, in the office. I'd still like to think there is still some semblance of openness after you are done with your restructuring. I want to thank you one more time for the great work you have done bringing this GREAT INJUSTICE to our attention. I certainly would not have discovered it without all the great accolades you have won for this from both men and women http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-07/22/sarah-sharp . You must be some kind of wonder woman. I am so very very appreciative that there is a woman out there willing to stand up to Linus verbal abuse and fight for those who are too afraid to stand up for themselves. You are just SO *fucking* cool. YOU GO GIRL SARAH. Thanks, Regina Obe -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Mon, 2013-07-22 at 21:42 -0400, Regina Obe wrote: Linus, I want to start off by saying, though I'm mostly a windows developer, Which means you're likely not invited to the annual mud-wrestling and toga party where this topic has been scheduled for further discussion. This thread and its offspring have been declared dead on LKML, we're in kernel development mode again. -Mike -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
RE: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
Which means you're likely not invited to the annual mud-wrestling and toga party where this topic has been scheduled for further discussion. This thread and its offspring have been declared dead on LKML, we're in kernel development mode again. -Mike That's okay. Just wanted to express my comments. Regina -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
Mike, I do want to partially apologize to Sarah for my first email. That was really much tongue in cheek to express what happens when things get too polite and professional and hope she wasn't too offended. I saw Sarah's last post http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg471360.html and see she's changed her tune a bit which is a lot more agreeable to me and I suspect others. However I still thinks she's a little bit too pendantic to the point of being really annoying and seeming like she's memorized the book of conduct quoting things like The book No Assholes Rule cites research that shows only 1% of subordinates bully their superiors and is ready to throw it in peoples faces if they infringe on the rules. Those rules are way too long to follow. Why can't you guys just trust your insticts and if you are relaly worried about Linus -- just make it a rule If anybody thinks X is acting as a jerk at this very moment -- call it out Honestly do yo guys even have time to read 20 pages of what is and ISN'T and insult. I also suspect the public viewers aren't going to be looking up at an Org Chart Hmm let me check if Linus is allowed to insult this guy :) When you are at the party since she's probably going to miss this note because its on a dead thread if you could convey my sentiments. Thanks, Regina -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On 07/15/2013 09:01:56 PM, Joe Perches wrote: On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 11:54 +1000, NeilBrown wrote: > On Mon, 15 Jul 2013 16:50:52 -0700 Joe Perches wrote: > > > On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 09:42 +1000, NeilBrown wrote: > > > Being "polite" without being "nice" is quite possible. > > > It even has a name: Diplomacy. > > > > And we all know how circular/indirect/implied/useless > > some of those diplomatic conversations can be. > > > > Just remember to bring a 'Big Stick' and don't be shy > > when it's necessary to display it. > > The behaviour you appear to be advocating is what is generally called > "bullying". Nope. It's called not being a pushover and being direct, clear and not just being unnecessarily forceful. Linux-kernel is an _epicially_ self-selected group. I expect the vast majority of people would be on Neil's side of this argument, not Joe's. But they've already walked away, and are not coming back. Rob-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On 07/15/2013 09:01:56 PM, Joe Perches wrote: On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 11:54 +1000, NeilBrown wrote: On Mon, 15 Jul 2013 16:50:52 -0700 Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote: On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 09:42 +1000, NeilBrown wrote: Being polite without being nice is quite possible. It even has a name: Diplomacy. And we all know how circular/indirect/implied/useless some of those diplomatic conversations can be. Just remember to bring a 'Big Stick' and don't be shy when it's necessary to display it. The behaviour you appear to be advocating is what is generally called bullying. Nope. It's called not being a pushover and being direct, clear and not just being unnecessarily forceful. Linux-kernel is an _epicially_ self-selected group. I expect the vast majority of people would be on Neil's side of this argument, not Joe's. But they've already walked away, and are not coming back. Rob-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] Maybe it's time to shut this thread down (Was: Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review)
On 07/18/2013 03:54 PM, Sarah Sharp wrote: > Let's shift this discussion away from the terms "abuse" and > "professionalism" to "respect" and "civility". Brilliant, and +1 for a session at KS. In the mean time, why don't we all try to demonstrate the real meaning of respect and civility, by practising it henceforth on LKML? KS ought to be about clarification, reinforcement and specific techniques, as opposed to the question of whether respect and civility are desirable in the first place. Nobody needs to wait for KS to learn the basic truth they already know in their heart. Regards, Daniel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] Maybe it's time to shut this thread down (Was: Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review)
On 07/18/2013 03:54 PM, Sarah Sharp wrote: Let's shift this discussion away from the terms abuse and professionalism to respect and civility. Brilliant, and +1 for a session at KS. In the mean time, why don't we all try to demonstrate the real meaning of respect and civility, by practising it henceforth on LKML? KS ought to be about clarification, reinforcement and specific techniques, as opposed to the question of whether respect and civility are desirable in the first place. Nobody needs to wait for KS to learn the basic truth they already know in their heart. Regards, Daniel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Maybe it's time to shut this thread down (Was: Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review)
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 04:03:24PM -0400, Kurt H Maier wrote: > On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 12:01:27PM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > > > I'm not trying to shut down this discussion. But please, let's continue > > this discussion at KS, away from the court of public opinion. I would > > love for this email to serve as a final summary of my opinion. We can > > use this email to start a conversation at KS, and we can argue our > > hearts out there about the various points. > > Well more than half your argument is about how "the court of public > opinion" regards interactions on the mailing list. Why is this > discussion exempt? Come to KS! You're more than welcome to discuss this with us there. With some schedule wrangling, I think we can make the session on LKML communication styles take place on the overlapping day between KS and LinuxCon. That should allow anyone from the wider open source community that wants to participate in this conversation do so. Sarah Sharp -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
* Rob Landley wrote: > On 07/15/2013 10:52:48 AM, Sarah Sharp wrote: > >On Fri, 12 Jul 2013 18:17:08 +0200, Ingo Molnar > >wrote: > >> * Linus Torvalds wrote: > >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. > > Not _all_ of us lose our voice when yelled at by Linus's lieutenants. > Some of us just post updates to the same darn patch series for 5 years > (yes really; my perl removal series started in 2008 and was applied > earlier this year), on the theory it's useful to the people actually > applying it to their own trees (at one point, gentoo), and that someday > the stars might be right and cthulu will arise from the deep and accept > the patch series into his tree. (Or in my case, Andrew Morton.) I think part of the root cause was that kbuild maintainership changed several times over the years and nobody really felt strongly enough about the Perl removal series. Despite best efforts there will always be long-lived Linux forks: the -rt/PREEMPT_RT kernel is meanwhile nearly a decade old now... :-/ Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
* Sarah Sharp wrote: > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 03:12:45PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > I react very strongly when somebody argues against fixing regressions. > > Let's just say that there's too many years of baggage that I carry > > around on that issue.. > > > > So that is definitely one of the things that make me go ballistic. > > Buggy code isn't actually one of them. Bugs happen. Even really stupid > > bugs happen, and happen to good people. They had a bad day, or it was > > just a brainfart. Not that I will be _polite_ about bad code, mind > > you, and there might be some bad words in there, but it doesn't make > > me blow up. > > > > Being cavalier about known regressions is definitely the primary > > trigger. I suspect there are others, but I can't seem to recall any > > other particular hot-button issues right now. Maybe Sarah can post a > > few more pointers.. > > Hmm... The only thing I can think of off the top of my head is that you > tend to hate it when someone puts the needs of their particular > architecture or distro at a higher priority than the needs of the kernel > community. If they start to push crap code late in the merge window to > further their personal goals, you tend to blow up at them. See the > 'deep throat' comment on the PE binary signing thread, for instance. > > The timing of when incidents happen also seems to effect whether you get > triggered. I suspect most of the incidents of you "blowing up" at > people happen during the merge window. Of course timing matters: - there are times when a bad pull request can have worse effects, such as shortly before -rc1 or shortly before -final - when many people will be exposed to a new kernel for the first time. - timing can also sometimes show a certain level of dishonesty on the developer's side: trying to slip in a bad tree near the end of the merge window, before people can complain it ... - there are times when Linus naturally more vulnerable to not having enough time to think things through: such as when he is pulling a dozen trees per day, during the merge window. Dishonesty, bad timing, running a bad Git flow and making irreversible ABI mistakes [of which refusing to fix app regressions is one sort] are all hot button issues for Linus, and it's a pretty natural list I think: because they are the least actionable, most persistent and thus riskiest "meta" problems possible in a kernel project. Some of Linus's "worst" flames had two or more of these hot button issues mixed together. Sometimes a maintainer can get away with a mistake (most likely Linus does not notice the mistake) but in general it's all pretty consistent. All in one, with all due respect, I don't think your complaints voiced so far against Linus have much merit :-/ I think you'll experience it first hand once you become a top level maintainer. Having said that, I do share your concern that women are more offput by the widespread 'manly' talk on lkml: LKML is filled with testosterone. I think your solution to create a separate culture is a good one - and eventually the two cultures will counter-balance each other in a good way and will maybe merge. I cannot think of a better solution either, and I fully support your efforts: it's one of the big unsolved problems of Linux kernel development. Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
* Sarah Sharp wrote: > On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 02:42:16AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > If you can point me to a single instance of Linus "abusing" someone > > who is not one of his trusted persons, who really should be able to > > deal with that, or someone who did not provoke him to go into rant > > mode, then I'm all on your side. > > Not that I think this link will sway you, and this thread *should* > really die down so we can discuss this at KS instead: > > https://plus.google.com/+LinusTorvalds/posts/1vyfmNCYpi5 > > "So here's a plea: if you have anything to do with security in a distro, > and think that my kids (replace "my kids" with "sales people on the > road" if you think your main customers are businesses) need to have the > root password to access some wireless network, or to be able to print > out a paper, or to change the date-and-time settings, please just kill > yourself now. The world will be a better place." > > Linus asked someone to go kill themselves. [...] No, he did not. He, as he declared it in the first stentences of his post, was venting and cursing: Venting. I don't think I can talk about "security" people without cursing, so you might want to avert your eyes now. I'm, as the author of several security patches, partly a distro "security person" too, and I was not offended, I took away the message from Linus: don't "fix" perceived security threats by cumbersome security measures, because users will address that by creating even larger security threats: http://www.merseyworld.com/precinct/Apr99/prec8.html Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
* Sarah Sharp sarah.a.sh...@linux.intel.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 02:42:16AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: If you can point me to a single instance of Linus abusing someone who is not one of his trusted persons, who really should be able to deal with that, or someone who did not provoke him to go into rant mode, then I'm all on your side. Not that I think this link will sway you, and this thread *should* really die down so we can discuss this at KS instead: https://plus.google.com/+LinusTorvalds/posts/1vyfmNCYpi5 So here's a plea: if you have anything to do with security in a distro, and think that my kids (replace my kids with sales people on the road if you think your main customers are businesses) need to have the root password to access some wireless network, or to be able to print out a paper, or to change the date-and-time settings, please just kill yourself now. The world will be a better place. Linus asked someone to go kill themselves. [...] No, he did not. He, as he declared it in the first stentences of his post, was venting and cursing: Venting. I don't think I can talk about security people without cursing, so you might want to avert your eyes now. I'm, as the author of several security patches, partly a distro security person too, and I was not offended, I took away the message from Linus: don't fix perceived security threats by cumbersome security measures, because users will address that by creating even larger security threats: http://www.merseyworld.com/precinct/Apr99/prec8.html Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
* Sarah Sharp sarah.a.sh...@linux.intel.com wrote: On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 03:12:45PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: I react very strongly when somebody argues against fixing regressions. Let's just say that there's too many years of baggage that I carry around on that issue.. So that is definitely one of the things that make me go ballistic. Buggy code isn't actually one of them. Bugs happen. Even really stupid bugs happen, and happen to good people. They had a bad day, or it was just a brainfart. Not that I will be _polite_ about bad code, mind you, and there might be some bad words in there, but it doesn't make me blow up. Being cavalier about known regressions is definitely the primary trigger. I suspect there are others, but I can't seem to recall any other particular hot-button issues right now. Maybe Sarah can post a few more pointers.. Hmm... The only thing I can think of off the top of my head is that you tend to hate it when someone puts the needs of their particular architecture or distro at a higher priority than the needs of the kernel community. If they start to push crap code late in the merge window to further their personal goals, you tend to blow up at them. See the 'deep throat' comment on the PE binary signing thread, for instance. The timing of when incidents happen also seems to effect whether you get triggered. I suspect most of the incidents of you blowing up at people happen during the merge window. Of course timing matters: - there are times when a bad pull request can have worse effects, such as shortly before -rc1 or shortly before -final - when many people will be exposed to a new kernel for the first time. - timing can also sometimes show a certain level of dishonesty on the developer's side: trying to slip in a bad tree near the end of the merge window, before people can complain it ... - there are times when Linus naturally more vulnerable to not having enough time to think things through: such as when he is pulling a dozen trees per day, during the merge window. Dishonesty, bad timing, running a bad Git flow and making irreversible ABI mistakes [of which refusing to fix app regressions is one sort] are all hot button issues for Linus, and it's a pretty natural list I think: because they are the least actionable, most persistent and thus riskiest meta problems possible in a kernel project. Some of Linus's worst flames had two or more of these hot button issues mixed together. Sometimes a maintainer can get away with a mistake (most likely Linus does not notice the mistake) but in general it's all pretty consistent. All in one, with all due respect, I don't think your complaints voiced so far against Linus have much merit :-/ I think you'll experience it first hand once you become a top level maintainer. Having said that, I do share your concern that women are more offput by the widespread 'manly' talk on lkml: LKML is filled with testosterone. I think your solution to create a separate culture is a good one - and eventually the two cultures will counter-balance each other in a good way and will maybe merge. I cannot think of a better solution either, and I fully support your efforts: it's one of the big unsolved problems of Linux kernel development. Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
* Rob Landley r...@landley.net wrote: On 07/15/2013 10:52:48 AM, Sarah Sharp wrote: On Fri, 12 Jul 2013 18:17:08 +0200, Ingo Molnar mi...@kernel.org wrote: * Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote: 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. Not _all_ of us lose our voice when yelled at by Linus's lieutenants. Some of us just post updates to the same darn patch series for 5 years (yes really; my perl removal series started in 2008 and was applied earlier this year), on the theory it's useful to the people actually applying it to their own trees (at one point, gentoo), and that someday the stars might be right and cthulu will arise from the deep and accept the patch series into his tree. (Or in my case, Andrew Morton.) I think part of the root cause was that kbuild maintainership changed several times over the years and nobody really felt strongly enough about the Perl removal series. Despite best efforts there will always be long-lived Linux forks: the -rt/PREEMPT_RT kernel is meanwhile nearly a decade old now... :-/ Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Maybe it's time to shut this thread down (Was: Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review)
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 04:03:24PM -0400, Kurt H Maier wrote: On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 12:01:27PM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: I'm not trying to shut down this discussion. But please, let's continue this discussion at KS, away from the court of public opinion. I would love for this email to serve as a final summary of my opinion. We can use this email to start a conversation at KS, and we can argue our hearts out there about the various points. Well more than half your argument is about how the court of public opinion regards interactions on the mailing list. Why is this discussion exempt? Come to KS! You're more than welcome to discuss this with us there. With some schedule wrangling, I think we can make the session on LKML communication styles take place on the overlapping day between KS and LinuxCon. That should allow anyone from the wider open source community that wants to participate in this conversation do so. Sarah Sharp -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Sarah Sharp wrote: > To me, being "professional" means treating each other with respect. Respect is earned, not automatic, and can be lost. A common mistake in our modern society is to think that everyone deserves respect; they don't. We should tolerate each other, not respect each other. -- Felipe Contreras -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Thu, 2013-07-18 at 09:07 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > The following statement is not respectful, because it targets the > person: > > "Seriously, Maintainer. Why are you pushing this kind of *crap* code to > me again? Why the hell did you mark it for stable when it's clearly > not a bug fix? Did you even try to f*cking compile this?" No it does not target the person at all. It targets what the person *did*. "Why are you *pushing* this ..." "Why the hell *did* you mark it..." "*Did* you even try to ..." See, it's all about the fact that the person did something stupid, and they are being called out on it. It is not any more of an attack on the person as the one attacking the code. But we can discuss this in more detail at KS. -- Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:39:07PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Sarah Sharp > > 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. > > > > > [...] > > > > 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. > > Sarah, that's a pretty potent argument by Linus, that "acting > professionally" risks replacing a raw but honest culture with a > polished but dishonest culture - which is harmful to developing > good technology. > > That's a valid concern. What's your reply to that argument? I don't feel the need to comment, because I feel it's a straw man argument. I feel that way because I disagree with the definition of professionalism that people have been pushing. To me, being "professional" means treating each other with respect. I can show emotion, express displeasure, be direct, and still show respect for my fellow developers. For example, I find the following statement to be both direct and respectful, because it's criticizing code, not the person: "This code is SHIT! It adds new warnings and it's marked for stable when it's clearly *crap code* that's not a bug fix. I'm going to revert this merge, and I expect a fix from you IMMEDIATELY." The following statement is not respectful, because it targets the person: "Seriously, Maintainer. Why are you pushing this kind of *crap* code to me again? Why the hell did you mark it for stable when it's clearly not a bug fix? Did you even try to f*cking compile this?" I would appreciate it if people would replace the word "professional" with "respectful" in this thread. It means something different to me than other people, and respect is much closer to what I'm looking for. I would appreciate it if kernel developers would show respect for each other, while focusing on criticizing code. As Rusty said, be gentle with people. You've called their baby ugly. Sarah Sharp -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Maybe it's time to shut this thread down (Was: Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review)
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 09:30:08AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > The reason why I started the kernel summit over ten years ago > was because there were certain topics that are much better discussed > in person, and that over time, if we don't have sufficient face to > face interactions, the quality of e-mail discussions can start to > become frayed. > > One of the reasons is that e-mail is just not as expressive a medium > as face-to-face conversations. As a result, when people feel that > they aren't being heard, because they aren't getting those critical > non-verbal cues, they start escalating. They start using stronger > words, such as F*CK. They start doing exactly what they claim to > abhor to their verbal opponents in the debate, which is describing > their fellow kernel developers using demeaning terms. They start > using loaded, and over-reaching words, like "abuse", which ultimately > ends up hurting their own case. > > I suspect this is happening because it's easy when a body feels that > their message of say, "could we please treat each other with more > respect", isn't getting heard, it's very easy and very tempting to > resort to "Linus is an AB--SER!". Let's shift this discussion away from the terms "abuse" and "professionalism" to "respect" and "civility". I agree that calling Linus an abuser is not conducive to moving this conversation forward. I agree not to use f*ck in my emails anymore, and, as Ted suggests, we'll see how polite requests get handled. > May I make the polite suggestion (and we'll see how well polite > requests get honored via e-mail), that we take this discussion > off-line, and wait to try to discuss this in person at the Kernel > Summit? I concur. Let's discuss this at KS. Sarah Sharp -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 02:42:16AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > If you can point me to a single instance of Linus "abusing" someone > who is not one of his trusted persons, who really should be able to > deal with that, or someone who did not provoke him to go into rant > mode, then I'm all on your side. Not that I think this link will sway you, and this thread *should* really die down so we can discuss this at KS instead: https://plus.google.com/+LinusTorvalds/posts/1vyfmNCYpi5 "So here's a plea: if you have anything to do with security in a distro, and think that my kids (replace "my kids" with "sales people on the road" if you think your main customers are businesses) need to have the root password to access some wireless network, or to be able to print out a paper, or to change the date-and-time settings, please just kill yourself now. The world will be a better place." Linus asked someone to go kill themselves. That someone was anyone involved in distro security, specifically OpenSuse. I think that qualifies as "not one of his trusted persons". I'll leave it up to you whether you think that statement was justified or civil. I don't think someone in a position of power should be encouraging developers to commit suicide, even if they did make a mistake. The Portland open source community has already had to deal with two developer suicides this year (Igal Koshevoy and Matthew): http://stumptownsyndicate.org/2013/04/09/goodbye-igal/ I personally don't want to be responsible for anyone else contemplating suicide, even because of an obviously sarcastic "joke". I don't joke about suicide. I would appreciate it if other developers refrained from joking about it as well. Sarah Sharp -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:39:07PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Linus Torvalds wrote: ... > > 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. > > Sarah, that's a pretty potent argument by Linus, that "acting > professionally" risks replacing a raw but honest culture with a > polished but dishonest culture - which is harmful to developing > good technology. > > That's a valid concern. What's your reply to that argument? First they came for my "WTF!?!"'s, then before I knew it the only way I could explain a simple integer-overflow problem involved anonymously-mailed copies of K and subtle hint-dropping to half-a-dozen managers! I'm not convinced by the slippery-slope argument here. Speaking just for myself, yeah, I'd be happier with less yelling all around. I'd be even more unhappy to lose the clear, direct criticism. (And the colorful personalities, too. I don't see why anyone needs to be bland.) I think that's a consistent position. --b. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Maybe it's time to shut this thread down (Was: Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review)
The reason why I started the kernel summit over ten years ago was because there were certain topics that are much better discussed in person, and that over time, if we don't have sufficient face to face interactions, the quality of e-mail discussions can start to become frayed. One of the reasons is that e-mail is just not as expressive a medium as face-to-face conversations. As a result, when people feel that they aren't being heard, because they aren't getting those critical non-verbal cues, they start escalating. They start using stronger words, such as F*CK. They start doing exactly what they claim to abhor to their verbal opponents in the debate, which is describing their fellow kernel developers using demeaning terms. They start using loaded, and over-reaching words, like "abuse", which ultimately ends up hurting their own case. I suspect this is happening because it's easy when a body feels that their message of say, "could we please treat each other with more respect", isn't getting heard, it's very easy and very tempting to resort to "Linus is an AB--SER!". May I make the polite suggestion (and we'll see how well polite requests get honored via e-mail), that we take this discussion off-line, and wait to try to discuss this in person at the Kernel Summit? Regards, - Ted -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:01:18AM -0400, CAI Qian wrote: > > > Could victim be someone else in the future since it is an example that > > > people may follow? Is Nik Wallenda an abuser because he walked across the Grand Canyon on a tightrope without a safety net, and that's an example that other people might follow (and fail at)? Seriously, the argument that someone are responsible for the actions and decisions of others is a pretty weak one. > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvio_Berlusconi_underage_prostitution_charges > > > It called "abuse of office" or abuse of the power. > > > > Wow! You are now comparing Linus to a Prime Minister that has paid > > underage prostitutes for sex? > I apologize that this leads to misunderstanding. It was just happened to > read the news that underage child does not feel like she is a victim > either while the law still think that is an abuse. Please show us the law which states that the language a coach might use to his team players is "abuse". And I think one of the big differences here is that there is a gargantuan power differential between the Italian Prime Minister and an underage prostitute. The power differential between Linus and his top subsystem maintainers? Not so much. Linus does not have hiring and firing power over us, and since he works at a non-profit which doesn't have stock options or a profit sharing agreement, he may be making less money than compared to some of his top lieutenants. So I'd suggest that people who are flinging around words like "abuse" stop. It's not helping your case, because it's not an accurate description of what's going on. Even if you believe that it really is abuse, from a tactical point of view, do you think telling subsystem maintainers (who have maintained that they do not feel personally attack, and do not feel abused), that they are too stupid to realize that they are really hapless victims is likely to make them listen to your point of view? There are much stronger arguments that can be made for more "civility". Regards, - Ted -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Thu, 2013-07-18 at 00:01 -0400, CAI Qian wrote: > > > > > So if you talk about abuse, then you need an abuser and a victim. So > > > > your argumentation falls flat because there is no victim. > > > Could victim be someone else in the future since it is an example that > > > people may follow? > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvio_Berlusconi_underage_prostitution_charges > > > It called "abuse of office" or abuse of the power. > > > > Wow! You are now comparing Linus to a Prime Minister that has paid > > underage prostitutes for sex? > I apologize that this leads to misunderstanding. It was just happened to > read the news that underage child does not feel like she is a victim > either while the law still think that is an abuse. Another example, those > BBC child abusers took ages to track down that probably because those > children did not feel victims at that time either. > > Please don't get me wrong. I did neither compare Linus to those child abusers > nor Thomas to those children. I simply pointed out there is also some common > sense need to consider. That story had nothing to do with this thread. "Abuse of power" is to use ones power for personal gain, whether it be monetary or sexual. Linus is not getting anything out of yelling at people (OK, it lets of steam). Linus's yelling is a management style, nothing more. -- Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
* Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Sarah Sharp > 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. > > [...] > > 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. Sarah, that's a pretty potent argument by Linus, that "acting professionally" risks replacing a raw but honest culture with a polished but dishonest culture - which is harmful to developing good technology. That's a valid concern. What's your reply to that argument? Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
* CAI Qian wrote: > > On 07/17/2013, CAI Qian wrote: > > > > > > On 07/17/2013, CAI Qian wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Could victim be someone else in the future since it is an > > > > > example that people may follow? > > > > > > > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvio_Berlusconi_underage_prostitution_charges > > > > > > > > > > It called "abuse of office" or abuse of the power. > > > > > [...] > > > > > > Please don't get me wrong. I did neither compare Linus to those > > > child abusers nor Thomas to those children. I simply pointed out > > > there is also some common sense need to consider. > > > > > > > Actually, you did. > > I am sorry to mislead you feeling that way, hpa. I think you are demonstrating the disutility of passive-aggressive communication patterns pretty nicely, making our point in essence. Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
- 原始邮件 - > 发件人: "H. Peter Anvin" > 收件人: "CAI Qian" > 抄送: "Steven Rostedt" , "Thomas Gleixner" > , "Sarah Sharp" > , "Linus Torvalds" > , "Ingo Molnar" , > "Guenter Roeck" , "Greg Kroah-Hartman" > , "Dave Jones" > , "Linux Kernel Mailing List" > , "Andrew Morton" > , "stable" , "Darren Hart" > > 发送时间: 星期四, 2013年 7 月 18日 下午 1:03:41 > 主题: Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review > > On 07/17/2013 09:01 PM, CAI Qian wrote: > > > > Please don't get me wrong. I did neither compare Linus to those child > > abusers > > nor Thomas to those children. I simply pointed out there is also some > > common > > sense need to consider. > > > > Actually, you did. I am sorry to mislead you feeling that way, hpa. > > -hpa > > > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in > the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
- 原始邮件 - 发件人: H. Peter Anvin h...@zytor.com 收件人: CAI Qian caiq...@redhat.com 抄送: Steven Rostedt rost...@goodmis.org, Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de, Sarah Sharp sarah.a.sh...@linux.intel.com, Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org, Ingo Molnar mi...@kernel.org, Guenter Roeck li...@roeck-us.net, Greg Kroah-Hartman gre...@linuxfoundation.org, Dave Jones da...@redhat.com, Linux Kernel Mailing List linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org, stable sta...@vger.kernel.org, Darren Hart dvh...@linux.intel.com 发送时间: 星期四, 2013年 7 月 18日 下午 1:03:41 主题: Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review On 07/17/2013 09:01 PM, CAI Qian wrote: Please don't get me wrong. I did neither compare Linus to those child abusers nor Thomas to those children. I simply pointed out there is also some common sense need to consider. Actually, you did. I am sorry to mislead you feeling that way, hpa. -hpa -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe stable in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
* CAI Qian caiq...@redhat.com wrote: On 07/17/2013, CAI Qian wrote: On 07/17/2013, CAI Qian wrote: Could victim be someone else in the future since it is an example that people may follow? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvio_Berlusconi_underage_prostitution_charges It called abuse of office or abuse of the power. [...] Please don't get me wrong. I did neither compare Linus to those child abusers nor Thomas to those children. I simply pointed out there is also some common sense need to consider. Actually, you did. I am sorry to mislead you feeling that way, hpa. I think you are demonstrating the disutility of passive-aggressive communication patterns pretty nicely, making our point in essence. Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
* Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote: On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Sarah Sharp sarah.a.sh...@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. [...] 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. Sarah, that's a pretty potent argument by Linus, that acting professionally risks replacing a raw but honest culture with a polished but dishonest culture - which is harmful to developing good technology. That's a valid concern. What's your reply to that argument? Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Thu, 2013-07-18 at 00:01 -0400, CAI Qian wrote: So if you talk about abuse, then you need an abuser and a victim. So your argumentation falls flat because there is no victim. Could victim be someone else in the future since it is an example that people may follow? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvio_Berlusconi_underage_prostitution_charges It called abuse of office or abuse of the power. Wow! You are now comparing Linus to a Prime Minister that has paid underage prostitutes for sex? I apologize that this leads to misunderstanding. It was just happened to read the news that underage child does not feel like she is a victim either while the law still think that is an abuse. Another example, those BBC child abusers took ages to track down that probably because those children did not feel victims at that time either. Please don't get me wrong. I did neither compare Linus to those child abusers nor Thomas to those children. I simply pointed out there is also some common sense need to consider. That story had nothing to do with this thread. Abuse of power is to use ones power for personal gain, whether it be monetary or sexual. Linus is not getting anything out of yelling at people (OK, it lets of steam). Linus's yelling is a management style, nothing more. -- Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:01:18AM -0400, CAI Qian wrote: Could victim be someone else in the future since it is an example that people may follow? Is Nik Wallenda an abuser because he walked across the Grand Canyon on a tightrope without a safety net, and that's an example that other people might follow (and fail at)? Seriously, the argument that someone are responsible for the actions and decisions of others is a pretty weak one. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvio_Berlusconi_underage_prostitution_charges It called abuse of office or abuse of the power. Wow! You are now comparing Linus to a Prime Minister that has paid underage prostitutes for sex? I apologize that this leads to misunderstanding. It was just happened to read the news that underage child does not feel like she is a victim either while the law still think that is an abuse. Please show us the law which states that the language a coach might use to his team players is abuse. And I think one of the big differences here is that there is a gargantuan power differential between the Italian Prime Minister and an underage prostitute. The power differential between Linus and his top subsystem maintainers? Not so much. Linus does not have hiring and firing power over us, and since he works at a non-profit which doesn't have stock options or a profit sharing agreement, he may be making less money than compared to some of his top lieutenants. So I'd suggest that people who are flinging around words like abuse stop. It's not helping your case, because it's not an accurate description of what's going on. Even if you believe that it really is abuse, from a tactical point of view, do you think telling subsystem maintainers (who have maintained that they do not feel personally attack, and do not feel abused), that they are too stupid to realize that they are really hapless victims is likely to make them listen to your point of view? There are much stronger arguments that can be made for more civility. Regards, - Ted -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Maybe it's time to shut this thread down (Was: Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review)
The reason why I started the kernel summit over ten years ago was because there were certain topics that are much better discussed in person, and that over time, if we don't have sufficient face to face interactions, the quality of e-mail discussions can start to become frayed. One of the reasons is that e-mail is just not as expressive a medium as face-to-face conversations. As a result, when people feel that they aren't being heard, because they aren't getting those critical non-verbal cues, they start escalating. They start using stronger words, such as F*CK. They start doing exactly what they claim to abhor to their verbal opponents in the debate, which is describing their fellow kernel developers using demeaning terms. They start using loaded, and over-reaching words, like abuse, which ultimately ends up hurting their own case. I suspect this is happening because it's easy when a body feels that their message of say, could we please treat each other with more respect, isn't getting heard, it's very easy and very tempting to resort to Linus is an AB--SER!. May I make the polite suggestion (and we'll see how well polite requests get honored via e-mail), that we take this discussion off-line, and wait to try to discuss this in person at the Kernel Summit? Regards, - Ted -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:39:07PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: * Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote: ... 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. Sarah, that's a pretty potent argument by Linus, that acting professionally risks replacing a raw but honest culture with a polished but dishonest culture - which is harmful to developing good technology. That's a valid concern. What's your reply to that argument? First they came for my WTF!?!'s, then before I knew it the only way I could explain a simple integer-overflow problem involved anonymously-mailed copies of KR and subtle hint-dropping to half-a-dozen managers! I'm not convinced by the slippery-slope argument here. Speaking just for myself, yeah, I'd be happier with less yelling all around. I'd be even more unhappy to lose the clear, direct criticism. (And the colorful personalities, too. I don't see why anyone needs to be bland.) I think that's a consistent position. --b. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 02:42:16AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: If you can point me to a single instance of Linus abusing someone who is not one of his trusted persons, who really should be able to deal with that, or someone who did not provoke him to go into rant mode, then I'm all on your side. Not that I think this link will sway you, and this thread *should* really die down so we can discuss this at KS instead: https://plus.google.com/+LinusTorvalds/posts/1vyfmNCYpi5 So here's a plea: if you have anything to do with security in a distro, and think that my kids (replace my kids with sales people on the road if you think your main customers are businesses) need to have the root password to access some wireless network, or to be able to print out a paper, or to change the date-and-time settings, please just kill yourself now. The world will be a better place. Linus asked someone to go kill themselves. That someone was anyone involved in distro security, specifically OpenSuse. I think that qualifies as not one of his trusted persons. I'll leave it up to you whether you think that statement was justified or civil. I don't think someone in a position of power should be encouraging developers to commit suicide, even if they did make a mistake. The Portland open source community has already had to deal with two developer suicides this year (Igal Koshevoy and Matthew): http://stumptownsyndicate.org/2013/04/09/goodbye-igal/ I personally don't want to be responsible for anyone else contemplating suicide, even because of an obviously sarcastic joke. I don't joke about suicide. I would appreciate it if other developers refrained from joking about it as well. Sarah Sharp -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Maybe it's time to shut this thread down (Was: Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review)
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 09:30:08AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: The reason why I started the kernel summit over ten years ago was because there were certain topics that are much better discussed in person, and that over time, if we don't have sufficient face to face interactions, the quality of e-mail discussions can start to become frayed. One of the reasons is that e-mail is just not as expressive a medium as face-to-face conversations. As a result, when people feel that they aren't being heard, because they aren't getting those critical non-verbal cues, they start escalating. They start using stronger words, such as F*CK. They start doing exactly what they claim to abhor to their verbal opponents in the debate, which is describing their fellow kernel developers using demeaning terms. They start using loaded, and over-reaching words, like abuse, which ultimately ends up hurting their own case. I suspect this is happening because it's easy when a body feels that their message of say, could we please treat each other with more respect, isn't getting heard, it's very easy and very tempting to resort to Linus is an AB--SER!. Let's shift this discussion away from the terms abuse and professionalism to respect and civility. I agree that calling Linus an abuser is not conducive to moving this conversation forward. I agree not to use f*ck in my emails anymore, and, as Ted suggests, we'll see how polite requests get handled. May I make the polite suggestion (and we'll see how well polite requests get honored via e-mail), that we take this discussion off-line, and wait to try to discuss this in person at the Kernel Summit? I concur. Let's discuss this at KS. Sarah Sharp -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:39:07PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: * Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote: On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Sarah Sharp sarah.a.sh...@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. [...] 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. Sarah, that's a pretty potent argument by Linus, that acting professionally risks replacing a raw but honest culture with a polished but dishonest culture - which is harmful to developing good technology. That's a valid concern. What's your reply to that argument? I don't feel the need to comment, because I feel it's a straw man argument. I feel that way because I disagree with the definition of professionalism that people have been pushing. To me, being professional means treating each other with respect. I can show emotion, express displeasure, be direct, and still show respect for my fellow developers. For example, I find the following statement to be both direct and respectful, because it's criticizing code, not the person: This code is SHIT! It adds new warnings and it's marked for stable when it's clearly *crap code* that's not a bug fix. I'm going to revert this merge, and I expect a fix from you IMMEDIATELY. The following statement is not respectful, because it targets the person: Seriously, Maintainer. Why are you pushing this kind of *crap* code to me again? Why the hell did you mark it for stable when it's clearly not a bug fix? Did you even try to f*cking compile this? I would appreciate it if people would replace the word professional with respectful in this thread. It means something different to me than other people, and respect is much closer to what I'm looking for. I would appreciate it if kernel developers would show respect for each other, while focusing on criticizing code. As Rusty said, be gentle with people. You've called their baby ugly. Sarah Sharp -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Thu, 2013-07-18 at 09:07 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: The following statement is not respectful, because it targets the person: Seriously, Maintainer. Why are you pushing this kind of *crap* code to me again? Why the hell did you mark it for stable when it's clearly not a bug fix? Did you even try to f*cking compile this? No it does not target the person at all. It targets what the person *did*. Why are you *pushing* this ... Why the hell *did* you mark it... *Did* you even try to ... See, it's all about the fact that the person did something stupid, and they are being called out on it. It is not any more of an attack on the person as the one attacking the code. But we can discuss this in more detail at KS. -- Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Sarah Sharp sarah.a.sh...@linux.intel.com wrote: To me, being professional means treating each other with respect. Respect is earned, not automatic, and can be lost. A common mistake in our modern society is to think that everyone deserves respect; they don't. We should tolerate each other, not respect each other. -- Felipe Contreras -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On 07/17/2013 09:01 PM, CAI Qian wrote: > > Please don't get me wrong. I did neither compare Linus to those child abusers > nor Thomas to those children. I simply pointed out there is also some common > sense need to consider. > Actually, you did. -hpa -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
- Original Message - > From: "Steven Rostedt" > To: "CAI Qian" > Cc: "Thomas Gleixner" , "Sarah Sharp" > , "Linus Torvalds" > , "Ingo Molnar" , "Guenter > Roeck" , "Greg > Kroah-Hartman" , "Dave Jones" , > "Linux Kernel Mailing List" > , "Andrew Morton" , > "stable" , > "Darren Hart" > Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2013 11:47:34 AM > Subject: Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review > > On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 23:16 -0400, CAI Qian wrote: > > > > So if you talk about abuse, then you need an abuser and a victim. So > > > your argumentation falls flat because there is no victim. > > Could victim be someone else in the future since it is an example that > > people may follow? > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvio_Berlusconi_underage_prostitution_charges > > It called "abuse of office" or abuse of the power. > > Wow! You are now comparing Linus to a Prime Minister that has paid > underage prostitutes for sex? > > That's pretty low. > > What Linus does is not an abuse of power, it's a protection of his baby. > He created Linux, and although today he's not the one writing the code, > he is ultimately the front man responsible for the kernel. Surely Linus has great responsibility, but isn't that every powerful person/organizatio could tell the same story? Berlusconi has a country to take care of; Jimmy Savile has a television kingdom to manage; NSA needs to protect world peace etc. > > Think about it. If Linux does something horrible, Linus is the one that > takes the most blame. That's a HUGE responsibility. Linus has the most > to lose if Linux becomes crap. > > Not only does Linus have to check on code, he must also dictate policy. > Which means dealing with different people, and how they work. If someone > gets lazy and uses his trust to get something whacky in, Linus takes the > blame for it if that happens. Thus, to prevent people from taking > advantage of his trust, he has to be hard on them to make sure he can > keep their trust. > > Linus takes his job seriously. He may joke and name his kernel after > 90's operating systems, but that's just to make the job more fun. But to > keep the job, he needs to be a hard ass. > > The few times he's yelled at me, he always did it with a bit of comedy > and wit. That makes the harsh yelling not so bad, and I actually got a > chuckle out of it. But I also took the harsh yelling in a way that I had > better not do that again. > > This is the big leagues folks. You think major league baseball managers > are nice to their players? > > "You just walked 4 players. That's not good. Keep this up I'll have to > take you out off the team". > > vs > > "What the f*ck is wrong with you. Get you head out of your @ss and start > throwing the ball over the God damn plate before I throw your @ss out of > this field!" > > They both relay basically the same thing. The first one is nice and > polite but states that bad things will happen if they keep it up. The > second is quite harsh (although never calling the person a name), and > will probably wake the person up and change his game. Which one of those > tones do you think successful baseball managers use? > > Sometimes tone *does* matter. You want quality from the top maintainers, > and they start to slack, you can't just treat them like this is a grade > school sport. Results matter. You want them to understand that this is > serious and cursing someone out gives that person that feeling. > > -- Steve > > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in > the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
- Original Message - > From: "Steven Rostedt" > To: "CAI Qian" > Cc: "Thomas Gleixner" , "Sarah Sharp" > , "Linus Torvalds" > , "Ingo Molnar" , "Guenter > Roeck" , "Greg > Kroah-Hartman" , "Dave Jones" , > "Linux Kernel Mailing List" > , "Andrew Morton" , > "stable" , > "Darren Hart" > Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2013 11:47:34 AM > Subject: Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review > > On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 23:16 -0400, CAI Qian wrote: > > > > So if you talk about abuse, then you need an abuser and a victim. So > > > your argumentation falls flat because there is no victim. > > Could victim be someone else in the future since it is an example that > > people may follow? > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvio_Berlusconi_underage_prostitution_charges > > It called "abuse of office" or abuse of the power. > > Wow! You are now comparing Linus to a Prime Minister that has paid > underage prostitutes for sex? I apologize that this leads to misunderstanding. It was just happened to read the news that underage child does not feel like she is a victim either while the law still think that is an abuse. Another example, those BBC child abusers took ages to track down that probably because those children did not feel victims at that time either. Please don't get me wrong. I did neither compare Linus to those child abusers nor Thomas to those children. I simply pointed out there is also some common sense need to consider. > > That's pretty low. > > What Linus does is not an abuse of power, it's a protection of his baby. > He created Linux, and although today he's not the one writing the code, > he is ultimately the front man responsible for the kernel. > > Think about it. If Linux does something horrible, Linus is the one that > takes the most blame. That's a HUGE responsibility. Linus has the most > to lose if Linux becomes crap. > > Not only does Linus have to check on code, he must also dictate policy. > Which means dealing with different people, and how they work. If someone > gets lazy and uses his trust to get something whacky in, Linus takes the > blame for it if that happens. Thus, to prevent people from taking > advantage of his trust, he has to be hard on them to make sure he can > keep their trust. > > Linus takes his job seriously. He may joke and name his kernel after > 90's operating systems, but that's just to make the job more fun. But to > keep the job, he needs to be a hard ass. > > The few times he's yelled at me, he always did it with a bit of comedy > and wit. That makes the harsh yelling not so bad, and I actually got a > chuckle out of it. But I also took the harsh yelling in a way that I had > better not do that again. > > This is the big leagues folks. You think major league baseball managers > are nice to their players? > > "You just walked 4 players. That's not good. Keep this up I'll have to > take you out off the team". > > vs > > "What the f*ck is wrong with you. Get you head out of your @ss and start > throwing the ball over the God damn plate before I throw your @ss out of > this field!" > > They both relay basically the same thing. The first one is nice and > polite but states that bad things will happen if they keep it up. The > second is quite harsh (although never calling the person a name), and > will probably wake the person up and change his game. Which one of those > tones do you think successful baseball managers use? > > Sometimes tone *does* matter. You want quality from the top maintainers, > and they start to slack, you can't just treat them like this is a grade > school sport. Results matter. You want them to understand that this is > serious and cursing someone out gives that person that feeling. > > -- Steve > > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
> If you can point me to a single instance of Linus "abusing" someone > who is not one of his trusted persons, who really should be able to > deal with that, or someone who did not provoke him to go into rant > mode, then I'm all on your side. Well, the one that comes to mind is Alan Cox and the TTY driver in 2009. And I still have to agree with his point about Linus's more absolute pronouncements on user-space regressions: taken literally, they mean that breaking rootkits is not okay. Here's the thread if anyonw would like to judge "who started it": http://marc.info/?t=12487011191 That said, I strongly agree with this point: > Linus simply has to trusts his top level maintainers, because he > cannot review, audit and check 10k patches which flow into his tree > every merge window himself. > > So if he finds out that someone who has his ultimate trust sends him a > pile of crap, he tells that person in his own unmisunderstandable way > that he's not amused. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 23:16 -0400, CAI Qian wrote: > > So if you talk about abuse, then you need an abuser and a victim. So > > your argumentation falls flat because there is no victim. > Could victim be someone else in the future since it is an example that > people may follow? > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvio_Berlusconi_underage_prostitution_charges > It called "abuse of office" or abuse of the power. Wow! You are now comparing Linus to a Prime Minister that has paid underage prostitutes for sex? That's pretty low. What Linus does is not an abuse of power, it's a protection of his baby. He created Linux, and although today he's not the one writing the code, he is ultimately the front man responsible for the kernel. Think about it. If Linux does something horrible, Linus is the one that takes the most blame. That's a HUGE responsibility. Linus has the most to lose if Linux becomes crap. Not only does Linus have to check on code, he must also dictate policy. Which means dealing with different people, and how they work. If someone gets lazy and uses his trust to get something whacky in, Linus takes the blame for it if that happens. Thus, to prevent people from taking advantage of his trust, he has to be hard on them to make sure he can keep their trust. Linus takes his job seriously. He may joke and name his kernel after 90's operating systems, but that's just to make the job more fun. But to keep the job, he needs to be a hard ass. The few times he's yelled at me, he always did it with a bit of comedy and wit. That makes the harsh yelling not so bad, and I actually got a chuckle out of it. But I also took the harsh yelling in a way that I had better not do that again. This is the big leagues folks. You think major league baseball managers are nice to their players? "You just walked 4 players. That's not good. Keep this up I'll have to take you out off the team". vs "What the f*ck is wrong with you. Get you head out of your @ss and start throwing the ball over the God damn plate before I throw your @ss out of this field!" They both relay basically the same thing. The first one is nice and polite but states that bad things will happen if they keep it up. The second is quite harsh (although never calling the person a name), and will probably wake the person up and change his game. Which one of those tones do you think successful baseball managers use? Sometimes tone *does* matter. You want quality from the top maintainers, and they start to slack, you can't just treat them like this is a grade school sport. Results matter. You want them to understand that this is serious and cursing someone out gives that person that feeling. -- Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
- Original Message - > From: "Thomas Gleixner" > To: "Sarah Sharp" > Cc: "Linus Torvalds" , "Ingo Molnar" > , "Guenter Roeck" > , "Greg Kroah-Hartman" , > "Steven Rostedt" , > "Dave Jones" , "Linux Kernel Mailing List" > , "Andrew Morton" > , "stable" , "Darren Hart" > > Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2013 8:42:16 AM > Subject: Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review > > On Mon, 15 Jul 2013, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 12:07:56PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Sarah Sharp > > > 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"? > > I'm one of the "victims" of Linus' latest "verbal abuse". :) > > Just for the record. I got grilled by Linus several times over the > last years and I can't remember a single instance where it was > unjustified. When I see such a mail in my inbox, I know that I fucked > up royally and all I do is to figure out what I broke this time and > fix it. I don't give a rat's ass about his "abusive" language. See > below. > > > exposed to your verbal abuse just because they "should have known > > better"? > > You know what "should have known better" stands for? > > It stands for violating trust. > > Linus simply has to trusts his top level maintainers, because he > cannot review, audit and check 10k patches which flow into his tree > every merge window himself. > > So if he finds out that someone who has his ultimate trust sends him a > pile of crap, he tells that person in his own unmisunderstandable way > that he's not amused. > > > 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. > > IOW, I'm a typical victim of abuse. > > Let me clarify that. > > The person who gets away with picking me for this kind of abuse has > not been born yet. And Linus knows very well, that he gets the full > pack back from me (in some different form of "abusive language") if he > yelled at me for no reason. It's documented out there including his > apologies. > > So if you talk about abuse, then you need an abuser and a victim. So > your argumentation falls flat because there is no victim. Could victim be someone else in the future since it is an example that people may follow? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvio_Berlusconi_underage_prostitution_charges It called "abuse of office" or abuse of the power. > > I do not care about his swear words and rants at all, because I know > that it makes him feel better. > > That's a cultural thing. > > Where I grew up it's part of the culture to explode, let off steam and > then go and have a beer together. I strongly believe this prevents > gastric ulcer and keeps you honest. Linus and I have this kind of > relationship. We respect each other, we trust each other and when one > side fucks up we yell at each other and then meet at the bar for a > drink. > > Linus did NOT abuse me in his latest rant. He simply told me in a very >
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Mon, 15 Jul 2013, Sarah Sharp wrote: > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 12:07:56PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Sarah Sharp > > 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"? I'm one of the "victims" of Linus' latest "verbal abuse". :) Just for the record. I got grilled by Linus several times over the last years and I can't remember a single instance where it was unjustified. When I see such a mail in my inbox, I know that I fucked up royally and all I do is to figure out what I broke this time and fix it. I don't give a rat's ass about his "abusive" language. See below. > exposed to your verbal abuse just because they "should have known > better"? You know what "should have known better" stands for? It stands for violating trust. Linus simply has to trusts his top level maintainers, because he cannot review, audit and check 10k patches which flow into his tree every merge window himself. So if he finds out that someone who has his ultimate trust sends him a pile of crap, he tells that person in his own unmisunderstandable way that he's not amused. > 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. IOW, I'm a typical victim of abuse. Let me clarify that. The person who gets away with picking me for this kind of abuse has not been born yet. And Linus knows very well, that he gets the full pack back from me (in some different form of "abusive language") if he yelled at me for no reason. It's documented out there including his apologies. So if you talk about abuse, then you need an abuser and a victim. So your argumentation falls flat because there is no victim. I do not care about his swear words and rants at all, because I know that it makes him feel better. That's a cultural thing. Where I grew up it's part of the culture to explode, let off steam and then go and have a beer together. I strongly believe this prevents gastric ulcer and keeps you honest. Linus and I have this kind of relationship. We respect each other, we trust each other and when one side fucks up we yell at each other and then meet at the bar for a drink. Linus did NOT abuse me in his latest rant. He simply told me in a very strong language that he's grumpy because I violated his trust. And that's legitimate. It's also legitimate to do that in public because it documents that the top level maintainers are not impeccable. And it sets a clear expectation bar for those who want to become maintainers of any level. Aside of that I completely agree with Linus, that this policital correctness crusades are merily creating more subtle and hard to fight forms of real abuse. I observe that every other day in big corporates, which have written down code of conducts and a gazillion of rules for interaction; they just foster dishonesty and other fallacies. I really prefer the honest slap from Linus than dealing with people who signed and "comply" to some code of conduct and stab you in your back wherever they can. If you can point me to a single instance of Linus "abusing" someone who is not one of his trusted persons, who really should be able to deal with that, or someone who did not provoke him to go into rant mode, then I'm all on your side. Aside of that, I agree that Linus could achieve the same effect by using a different (more palatable to you) language, but that's a different story. Thanks, tglx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:17 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > Google "management by perkele". Actually, not even our former president mr. Kekkonen never went quite as far using this method. I think something along the lines of legendary 'saatanan tunarit' would suffice next time :) -- Janne -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
- Original Message - > From: "Joe Perches" > To: "NeilBrown" > Cc: "Steven Rostedt" , "J. Bruce Fields" > , "Linus Torvalds" > , "Sarah Sharp" > , "Ingo Molnar" , > "Guenter Roeck" , "Greg Kroah-Hartman" > , "Dave Jones" > , "Linux Kernel Mailing List" > , "Andrew Morton" > , "stable" , "Darren Hart" > > Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 7:50:52 AM > Subject: Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review > > On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 09:42 +1000, NeilBrown wrote: > > Being "polite" without being "nice" is quite possible. > > It even has a name: Diplomacy. > > And we all know how circular/indirect/implied/useless > some of those diplomatic conversations can be. Modern human is more diplomatic than ancient barbarians. Will the trend continue? > > Just remember to bring a 'Big Stick' and don't be shy > when it's necessary to display it. > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in > the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
- Original Message - From: Joe Perches j...@perches.com To: NeilBrown ne...@suse.de Cc: Steven Rostedt rost...@goodmis.org, J. Bruce Fields bfie...@fieldses.org, Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org, Sarah Sharp sarah.a.sh...@linux.intel.com, Ingo Molnar mi...@kernel.org, Guenter Roeck li...@roeck-us.net, Greg Kroah-Hartman gre...@linuxfoundation.org, Dave Jones da...@redhat.com, Linux Kernel Mailing List linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org, stable sta...@vger.kernel.org, Darren Hart dvh...@linux.intel.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 7:50:52 AM Subject: Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 09:42 +1000, NeilBrown wrote: Being polite without being nice is quite possible. It even has a name: Diplomacy. And we all know how circular/indirect/implied/useless some of those diplomatic conversations can be. Modern human is more diplomatic than ancient barbarians. Will the trend continue? Just remember to bring a 'Big Stick' and don't be shy when it's necessary to display it. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe stable in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:17 PM, Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote: Google management by perkele. Actually, not even our former president mr. Kekkonen never went quite as far using this method. I think something along the lines of legendary 'saatanan tunarit' would suffice next time :) -- Janne -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Mon, 15 Jul 2013, Sarah Sharp wrote: 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.sh...@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? I'm one of the victims of Linus' latest verbal abuse. :) Just for the record. I got grilled by Linus several times over the last years and I can't remember a single instance where it was unjustified. When I see such a mail in my inbox, I know that I fucked up royally and all I do is to figure out what I broke this time and fix it. I don't give a rat's ass about his abusive language. See below. exposed to your verbal abuse just because they should have known better? You know what should have known better stands for? It stands for violating trust. Linus simply has to trusts his top level maintainers, because he cannot review, audit and check 10k patches which flow into his tree every merge window himself. So if he finds out that someone who has his ultimate trust sends him a pile of crap, he tells that person in his own unmisunderstandable way that he's not amused. 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. IOW, I'm a typical victim of abuse. Let me clarify that. The person who gets away with picking me for this kind of abuse has not been born yet. And Linus knows very well, that he gets the full pack back from me (in some different form of abusive language) if he yelled at me for no reason. It's documented out there including his apologies. So if you talk about abuse, then you need an abuser and a victim. So your argumentation falls flat because there is no victim. I do not care about his swear words and rants at all, because I know that it makes him feel better. That's a cultural thing. Where I grew up it's part of the culture to explode, let off steam and then go and have a beer together. I strongly believe this prevents gastric ulcer and keeps you honest. Linus and I have this kind of relationship. We respect each other, we trust each other and when one side fucks up we yell at each other and then meet at the bar for a drink. Linus did NOT abuse me in his latest rant. He simply told me in a very strong language that he's grumpy because I violated his trust. And that's legitimate. It's also legitimate to do that in public because it documents that the top level maintainers are not impeccable. And it sets a clear expectation bar for those who want to become maintainers of any level. Aside of that I completely agree with Linus, that this policital correctness crusades are merily creating more subtle and hard to fight forms of real abuse. I observe that every other day in big corporates, which have written down code of conducts and a gazillion of rules for interaction; they just foster dishonesty and other fallacies. I really prefer the honest slap from Linus than dealing with people who signed and comply to some code of conduct and stab you in your back wherever they can. If you can point me to a single instance of Linus abusing someone who is not one of his trusted persons, who really should be able to deal with that, or someone who did not provoke him to go into rant mode, then I'm all on your side. Aside of that, I agree that Linus could achieve the same effect by using a different (more palatable to you) language, but that's a different story. Thanks, tglx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
- Original Message - From: Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de To: Sarah Sharp sarah.a.sh...@linux.intel.com Cc: Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org, Ingo Molnar mi...@kernel.org, Guenter Roeck li...@roeck-us.net, Greg Kroah-Hartman gre...@linuxfoundation.org, Steven Rostedt rost...@goodmis.org, Dave Jones da...@redhat.com, Linux Kernel Mailing List linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org, stable sta...@vger.kernel.org, Darren Hart dvh...@linux.intel.com Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2013 8:42:16 AM Subject: Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review On Mon, 15 Jul 2013, Sarah Sharp wrote: 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.sh...@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? I'm one of the victims of Linus' latest verbal abuse. :) Just for the record. I got grilled by Linus several times over the last years and I can't remember a single instance where it was unjustified. When I see such a mail in my inbox, I know that I fucked up royally and all I do is to figure out what I broke this time and fix it. I don't give a rat's ass about his abusive language. See below. exposed to your verbal abuse just because they should have known better? You know what should have known better stands for? It stands for violating trust. Linus simply has to trusts his top level maintainers, because he cannot review, audit and check 10k patches which flow into his tree every merge window himself. So if he finds out that someone who has his ultimate trust sends him a pile of crap, he tells that person in his own unmisunderstandable way that he's not amused. 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. IOW, I'm a typical victim of abuse. Let me clarify that. The person who gets away with picking me for this kind of abuse has not been born yet. And Linus knows very well, that he gets the full pack back from me (in some different form of abusive language) if he yelled at me for no reason. It's documented out there including his apologies. So if you talk about abuse, then you need an abuser and a victim. So your argumentation falls flat because there is no victim. Could victim be someone else in the future since it is an example that people may follow? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvio_Berlusconi_underage_prostitution_charges It called abuse of office or abuse of the power. I do not care about his swear words and rants at all, because I know that it makes him feel better. That's a cultural thing. Where I grew up it's part of the culture to explode, let off steam and then go and have a beer together. I strongly believe this prevents gastric ulcer and keeps you honest. Linus and I have this kind of relationship. We respect each other, we trust each other and when one side fucks up we yell at each other and then meet at the bar for a drink. Linus did NOT abuse me in his latest rant. He simply told me in a very strong language that he's grumpy because I violated his trust. And that's legitimate. It's also legitimate to do that in public because it documents that the top level maintainers are not impeccable. And it sets a clear expectation bar for those who want to become maintainers of any level. Aside of that I completely agree with Linus, that this policital correctness crusades are merily creating more subtle and hard to fight forms of real abuse. I observe that every other day in big corporates, which have written down code of conducts and a gazillion of rules for interaction; they just foster dishonesty and other
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 23:16 -0400, CAI Qian wrote: So if you talk about abuse, then you need an abuser and a victim. So your argumentation falls flat because there is no victim. Could victim be someone else in the future since it is an example that people may follow? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvio_Berlusconi_underage_prostitution_charges It called abuse of office or abuse of the power. Wow! You are now comparing Linus to a Prime Minister that has paid underage prostitutes for sex? That's pretty low. What Linus does is not an abuse of power, it's a protection of his baby. He created Linux, and although today he's not the one writing the code, he is ultimately the front man responsible for the kernel. Think about it. If Linux does something horrible, Linus is the one that takes the most blame. That's a HUGE responsibility. Linus has the most to lose if Linux becomes crap. Not only does Linus have to check on code, he must also dictate policy. Which means dealing with different people, and how they work. If someone gets lazy and uses his trust to get something whacky in, Linus takes the blame for it if that happens. Thus, to prevent people from taking advantage of his trust, he has to be hard on them to make sure he can keep their trust. Linus takes his job seriously. He may joke and name his kernel after 90's operating systems, but that's just to make the job more fun. But to keep the job, he needs to be a hard ass. The few times he's yelled at me, he always did it with a bit of comedy and wit. That makes the harsh yelling not so bad, and I actually got a chuckle out of it. But I also took the harsh yelling in a way that I had better not do that again. This is the big leagues folks. You think major league baseball managers are nice to their players? You just walked 4 players. That's not good. Keep this up I'll have to take you out off the team. vs What the f*ck is wrong with you. Get you head out of your @ss and start throwing the ball over the God damn plate before I throw your @ss out of this field! They both relay basically the same thing. The first one is nice and polite but states that bad things will happen if they keep it up. The second is quite harsh (although never calling the person a name), and will probably wake the person up and change his game. Which one of those tones do you think successful baseball managers use? Sometimes tone *does* matter. You want quality from the top maintainers, and they start to slack, you can't just treat them like this is a grade school sport. Results matter. You want them to understand that this is serious and cursing someone out gives that person that feeling. -- Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
If you can point me to a single instance of Linus abusing someone who is not one of his trusted persons, who really should be able to deal with that, or someone who did not provoke him to go into rant mode, then I'm all on your side. Well, the one that comes to mind is Alan Cox and the TTY driver in 2009. And I still have to agree with his point about Linus's more absolute pronouncements on user-space regressions: taken literally, they mean that breaking rootkits is not okay. Here's the thread if anyonw would like to judge who started it: http://marc.info/?t=12487011191 That said, I strongly agree with this point: Linus simply has to trusts his top level maintainers, because he cannot review, audit and check 10k patches which flow into his tree every merge window himself. So if he finds out that someone who has his ultimate trust sends him a pile of crap, he tells that person in his own unmisunderstandable way that he's not amused. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
- Original Message - From: Steven Rostedt rost...@goodmis.org To: CAI Qian caiq...@redhat.com Cc: Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de, Sarah Sharp sarah.a.sh...@linux.intel.com, Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org, Ingo Molnar mi...@kernel.org, Guenter Roeck li...@roeck-us.net, Greg Kroah-Hartman gre...@linuxfoundation.org, Dave Jones da...@redhat.com, Linux Kernel Mailing List linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org, stable sta...@vger.kernel.org, Darren Hart dvh...@linux.intel.com Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2013 11:47:34 AM Subject: Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 23:16 -0400, CAI Qian wrote: So if you talk about abuse, then you need an abuser and a victim. So your argumentation falls flat because there is no victim. Could victim be someone else in the future since it is an example that people may follow? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvio_Berlusconi_underage_prostitution_charges It called abuse of office or abuse of the power. Wow! You are now comparing Linus to a Prime Minister that has paid underage prostitutes for sex? I apologize that this leads to misunderstanding. It was just happened to read the news that underage child does not feel like she is a victim either while the law still think that is an abuse. Another example, those BBC child abusers took ages to track down that probably because those children did not feel victims at that time either. Please don't get me wrong. I did neither compare Linus to those child abusers nor Thomas to those children. I simply pointed out there is also some common sense need to consider. That's pretty low. What Linus does is not an abuse of power, it's a protection of his baby. He created Linux, and although today he's not the one writing the code, he is ultimately the front man responsible for the kernel. Think about it. If Linux does something horrible, Linus is the one that takes the most blame. That's a HUGE responsibility. Linus has the most to lose if Linux becomes crap. Not only does Linus have to check on code, he must also dictate policy. Which means dealing with different people, and how they work. If someone gets lazy and uses his trust to get something whacky in, Linus takes the blame for it if that happens. Thus, to prevent people from taking advantage of his trust, he has to be hard on them to make sure he can keep their trust. Linus takes his job seriously. He may joke and name his kernel after 90's operating systems, but that's just to make the job more fun. But to keep the job, he needs to be a hard ass. The few times he's yelled at me, he always did it with a bit of comedy and wit. That makes the harsh yelling not so bad, and I actually got a chuckle out of it. But I also took the harsh yelling in a way that I had better not do that again. This is the big leagues folks. You think major league baseball managers are nice to their players? You just walked 4 players. That's not good. Keep this up I'll have to take you out off the team. vs What the f*ck is wrong with you. Get you head out of your @ss and start throwing the ball over the God damn plate before I throw your @ss out of this field! They both relay basically the same thing. The first one is nice and polite but states that bad things will happen if they keep it up. The second is quite harsh (although never calling the person a name), and will probably wake the person up and change his game. Which one of those tones do you think successful baseball managers use? Sometimes tone *does* matter. You want quality from the top maintainers, and they start to slack, you can't just treat them like this is a grade school sport. Results matter. You want them to understand that this is serious and cursing someone out gives that person that feeling. -- Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
- Original Message - From: Steven Rostedt rost...@goodmis.org To: CAI Qian caiq...@redhat.com Cc: Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de, Sarah Sharp sarah.a.sh...@linux.intel.com, Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org, Ingo Molnar mi...@kernel.org, Guenter Roeck li...@roeck-us.net, Greg Kroah-Hartman gre...@linuxfoundation.org, Dave Jones da...@redhat.com, Linux Kernel Mailing List linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org, stable sta...@vger.kernel.org, Darren Hart dvh...@linux.intel.com Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2013 11:47:34 AM Subject: Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 23:16 -0400, CAI Qian wrote: So if you talk about abuse, then you need an abuser and a victim. So your argumentation falls flat because there is no victim. Could victim be someone else in the future since it is an example that people may follow? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvio_Berlusconi_underage_prostitution_charges It called abuse of office or abuse of the power. Wow! You are now comparing Linus to a Prime Minister that has paid underage prostitutes for sex? That's pretty low. What Linus does is not an abuse of power, it's a protection of his baby. He created Linux, and although today he's not the one writing the code, he is ultimately the front man responsible for the kernel. Surely Linus has great responsibility, but isn't that every powerful person/organizatio could tell the same story? Berlusconi has a country to take care of; Jimmy Savile has a television kingdom to manage; NSA needs to protect world peace etc. Think about it. If Linux does something horrible, Linus is the one that takes the most blame. That's a HUGE responsibility. Linus has the most to lose if Linux becomes crap. Not only does Linus have to check on code, he must also dictate policy. Which means dealing with different people, and how they work. If someone gets lazy and uses his trust to get something whacky in, Linus takes the blame for it if that happens. Thus, to prevent people from taking advantage of his trust, he has to be hard on them to make sure he can keep their trust. Linus takes his job seriously. He may joke and name his kernel after 90's operating systems, but that's just to make the job more fun. But to keep the job, he needs to be a hard ass. The few times he's yelled at me, he always did it with a bit of comedy and wit. That makes the harsh yelling not so bad, and I actually got a chuckle out of it. But I also took the harsh yelling in a way that I had better not do that again. This is the big leagues folks. You think major league baseball managers are nice to their players? You just walked 4 players. That's not good. Keep this up I'll have to take you out off the team. vs What the f*ck is wrong with you. Get you head out of your @ss and start throwing the ball over the God damn plate before I throw your @ss out of this field! They both relay basically the same thing. The first one is nice and polite but states that bad things will happen if they keep it up. The second is quite harsh (although never calling the person a name), and will probably wake the person up and change his game. Which one of those tones do you think successful baseball managers use? Sometimes tone *does* matter. You want quality from the top maintainers, and they start to slack, you can't just treat them like this is a grade school sport. Results matter. You want them to understand that this is serious and cursing someone out gives that person that feeling. -- Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe stable in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On 07/17/2013 09:01 PM, CAI Qian wrote: Please don't get me wrong. I did neither compare Linus to those child abusers nor Thomas to those children. I simply pointed out there is also some common sense need to consider. Actually, you did. -hpa -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 03:12:45PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > I react very strongly when somebody argues against fixing regressions. > Let's just say that there's too many years of baggage that I carry > around on that issue.. > > So that is definitely one of the things that make me go ballistic. > Buggy code isn't actually one of them. Bugs happen. Even really stupid > bugs happen, and happen to good people. They had a bad day, or it was > just a brainfart. Not that I will be _polite_ about bad code, mind > you, and there might be some bad words in there, but it doesn't make > me blow up. > > Being cavalier about known regressions is definitely the primary > trigger. I suspect there are others, but I can't seem to recall any > other particular hot-button issues right now. Maybe Sarah can post a > few more pointers.. Hmm... The only thing I can think of off the top of my head is that you tend to hate it when someone puts the needs of their particular architecture or distro at a higher priority than the needs of the kernel community. If they start to push crap code late in the merge window to further their personal goals, you tend to blow up at them. See the 'deep throat' comment on the PE binary signing thread, for instance. The timing of when incidents happen also seems to effect whether you get triggered. I suspect most of the incidents of you "blowing up" at people happen during the merge window. Sarah Sharp -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 18:37 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 6:02 PM, Rusty Russell wrote: > >> > >> "Mauro, SHUT THE FUCK UP!" > > > > This one crosses the line. There's no non-offensive way to tell a geek > > "you are wrong", but this isn't even trying. Bad Linus! > > You know what? Not my proudest moment. I was really upset. This goes a long way to resolving the stated issues in my opinion. Of the three issues raised, Linus has either adequately justified himself or conceded. This wasn't meant to be Linus on trial was it? :-) I'm sure we could dig up a thousand more references of "bad" behavior from others on LKML. Before we do let's first make sure the recipient is not being "resistant to education" (a phrase I've picked up from Thomas Gleixner and like very much) or has somehow provoked things. Ted Ts'o will recall fondly all the pigs in guinea *smirk*. I enjoy a good rant as much as anyone, but I recognize personal attacks can be very harmful to the individual and possibly (difficult to prove) the quality of the project. This is especially true when coming from someone that is held in very high regard, such as Linus and the other maintainers. I think the one tangible TODO that has come out of this is to DOCUMENT expectations. Paul Gortmaker has already submitted a netdev FAQ which I have reviewed and David Miller approved of. I have committed to review stable_kernel_rules. It appears there is also call to have Linus' expectations of the maintainers documented. This would also be good for everyone to read to better understand the responses they receive from maintainers and why things are the way they are. With that done, I think some tolerance in both directions would improve things here. And as a last resort, we speak up when someone is under attack. "Whoa Nelly, calm down, don't forget your meds. Seriously though, that (is not acceptable code|violates a core policy), see the following documentation." This adds some burden on the broader audience to point people at the docs, because even RTFM has to get annoying to repeat too often. And with that, I'll sign out of this thread unless anyone wants to discuss documentation - but those should probably happen on LKML (or maybe KS as some have suggested). -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center Yocto Project - Linux Kernel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 18:37 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Emotions aren't bad. Quite the reverse. Spock and Dr. Sheldon Cooper strongly disagree. -- Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 6:02 PM, Rusty Russell wrote: >> >> "Mauro, SHUT THE FUCK UP!" > > This one crosses the line. There's no non-offensive way to tell a geek > "you are wrong", but this isn't even trying. Bad Linus! You know what? Not my proudest moment. I was really upset. But that said, in my defense I actually think that one stands out. I have written a lot of public emails, and that one line is probably the single most over-the-line one. Or at least pretty close to the top. And it's not so much because of the swearing, but because of the "shut up" part. Or is that just me not reacting to swearwords again? Do I go overboard sometimes? Hell yes. But I get emotional about some of this, and I not only think that's ok, I actually think it's important. You mentioned the "lost the raw, red-hot anger of the original", and I do think emotion is important to convey. It's not just the message, it's also the fact that I'm really really pissed. Neil Brown here somewhere earlier said "So my personal perspective on what it means to be responsible is: Don't flame: include the facts, exclude the emotion." and I can't overstate how much I disagree. You do need the factual part too, but "exclude the emotion" is not good either. Emotions aren't bad. Quite the reverse. If we are expected to have a sense of personal trust between the people involved (and quite frankly, apart from just "technical excellence" I think personal trust is just about the top criterion for good maintainers), I definitely think that it's not about just about the facts. You need to hear the *person* too. And some people are calm and don't swear, and that's them. Others aren't. Yeah, yeah, I go overboard. Whatever. At least you guys know that when I get emotional, I'm not going to come asking for a shoulder to cry on. I think a little excessive swearing is less awkward for everybody in the end. Linus Side note: the whole "trust the person" doesn't mean you have to like that person. "Trust" is about having your expectations met, not necessarily about those expectations always being all that positive. . -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
Sarah Sharp writes: > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 02:22:14PM +0930, Rusty Russell wrote: > Linus is complaining about code here, and the effects of merging bad > code on his own tree. I personally have no qualms with this type of > harsh email, because it focuses on the code, not the person. > > I do, however, object when the verbal abuse shifts from being directed > at code to being directed at *people*. For example, Linus chose to > curse at Mauro [2] and Rafael [3], rather than their code: > > > "Mauro, SHUT THE FUCK UP!" This one crosses the line. There's no non-offensive way to tell a geek "you are wrong", but this isn't even trying. Bad Linus! > "How long have you been a maintainer? And you *still* haven't learnt the > first rule of kernel maintenance?" > > "Shut up, Mauro. And I don't _ever_ want to hear that kind of obvious > garbage and idiocy from a kernel maintainer again. Seriously." > > "The fact that you then try to make *excuses* for breaking user space, > and blaming some external program that *used* to work, is just > shameful. It's not how we work." > > "Fix your f*cking "compliance tool", because it is obviously broken. > And fix your approach to kernel programming." ... > ...and I'm surprised to > hear that kind of utter garbage from you in particular." Linus repeats 5 times: you can tell he's upset. > "Seriously. Why do I even have to mention this? Why do I have to > explain this to somebody pretty much *every* f*cking merge window?" This one is OK, actually. So, I tried to rewrite Linus' email. And it lost the raw, red-hot anger of the original. It no longer makes everyone listen. It tempts one to argue. It is not as effective :( But suggesting alternate expressions might be constructive. Rusty. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > In fact, I didn't say what I really wanted to say in that reply to the > reporter > and that evidently confused you, which only made me think it was better to be > more careful about sending replies to regression reports when Linus is on the > CC list. But it was kind of fun to watch you go ballistic by mistake. ;-) And that's why I actually mentioned in my reply to Sarah that "(in fact, with Rafael it was at least partially just bad communication, and I haven't had that issue with him before)", because I have this distinct memory that we ended up having that exact discussion about misunderstanding and bad wording at the time. I react very strongly when somebody argues against fixing regressions. Let's just say that there's too many years of baggage that I carry around on that issue.. So that is definitely one of the things that make me go ballistic. Buggy code isn't actually one of them. Bugs happen. Even really stupid bugs happen, and happen to good people. They had a bad day, or it was just a brainfart. Not that I will be _polite_ about bad code, mind you, and there might be some bad words in there, but it doesn't make me blow up. Being cavalier about known regressions is definitely the primary trigger. I suspect there are others, but I can't seem to recall any other particular hot-button issues right now. Maybe Sarah can post a few more pointers.. Linus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 02:08:56PM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > Rusty hit the nail on the head here. I want everyone (including Linus) > to be harsh with code but gentle with people. Just as a side note Sarah, in some cultures/languages, "I want" is extremely impolite, almost insulting to your interlocutor. In France, if you want to quickly upset someone, simply say "I want you to do this or that". The polite form is "I would like you to do that", "I would appreciate..." or "let's do that", and when you're slightly upset or in a hurry, better simply say "do that" without putting yourself prominently as the one who has some unexplained reasons for demanding something. With that said, this thread has probably lived too long. I think we're starting to fuck flies, and once we won't have any living flies left, someone will have to bring new files, and it's certainly not me. Regards, Willy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Tuesday, July 16, 2013 02:23:46 PM Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Sarah Sharp
> wrote:
> >
> > I do, however, object when the verbal abuse shifts from being directed
> > at code to being directed at *people*. For example, Linus chose to
> > curse at Mauro [2] and Rafael [3], rather than their code:
>
> Umm. Because it was actually the person who was the problem?
>
> Trust me, there's a really easy way for me to curse at people: if you
> are a maintainer, and you make excuses for your bugs rather than
> trying to fix them, I will curse at *YOU*.
>
> Because then the problem really is you.
>
> And in *both* of the examples you cite, that was exactly the issue. It
> wasn't that there was a bug - it was that the maintainer in question
> basically refused to fix a regression.
>
> Sure, there was a code problem. But that wasn't the big issue. Code
> can be broken, and can be utter crap, but as long as it's fixed, who
> cares?
>
> But when top-level maintainers start ignoring the #1 rule in the
> kernel ("We don't regress user space"), then it's not the broken code
> that annoys me any more.
>
> See the difference?
>
> And yes, people who don't get this are people who I will literally
> refuse to work with. In both of the cases you cite, things resolved
> themselves quickly (in fact, with Rafael it was at least partially
> just bad communication, and I haven't had that issue with him before).
Actually, I didn't feel like I was being attacked personally then.
In fact, I didn't say what I really wanted to say in that reply to the reporter
and that evidently confused you, which only made me think it was better to be
more careful about sending replies to regression reports when Linus is on the
CC list. But it was kind of fun to watch you go ballistic by mistake. ;-)
And the problem itself was really confusing IIRC (that was a regression in a
piece of code that wasn't even executed as a result of a different bug and the
fix for that different bug caused the regression to show up).
So no, not really a good example of "Linus cursing at people" as far as I'm
concerned.
Rafael
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 14:08 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > "Mauro, SHUT THE FUCK UP!" > > "How long have you been a maintainer? And you *still* haven't learnt the > first rule of kernel maintenance?" > > "Shut up, Mauro. And I don't _ever_ want to hear that kind of obvious > garbage and idiocy from a kernel maintainer again. Seriously." > > "The fact that you then try to make *excuses* for breaking user space, > and blaming some external program that *used* to work, is just > shameful. It's not how we work." > > "Fix your f*cking "compliance tool", because it is obviously broken. > And fix your approach to kernel programming." > > "Seriously. Why do I even have to mention this? Why do I have to > explain this to somebody pretty much *every* f*cking merge window?" > > "And btw, the *reason* for that rule becoming such a hard rule was > pretty much exactly suspend/resume and ACPI. Exactly because we used > to have those infinite "let's fix one thing and break another" dances. > So you should be well acquainted with the rule, and I'm surprised to > hear that kind of utter garbage from you in particular." Reading all this again, it seems that Linus is pissed off at what Mauro said, did or is doing. I don't really see a direct attack at Mauro as a person. Not much different than being pissed off at someone asking Linus to pull crap that's marked for stable. I see a very fine line between the two. Also, it seems that Linus is more disappointed with Mauro, as he expects more from him. Honestly, sometimes Linus needs to yell louder to top maintainers. As its a way to wake us up that we need to be held to a higher regard. Sometimes we may get complacent, and a bit lazy. If a top maintainer starts to slack, major damage can be done. It needs to be serious. I don't see the above as public shaming. It really just points out what Linus expects from all maintainers, which would have been lost if this were a private email. > > > The personally directed verbal abuse is what I'm complaining about here. > Linus goes from 0 to 11 at the drop of an "I don't think this is a > regression" comment, and publicly ridicules his top maintainers. > > This is not right. This is not a community that people want to be a > part of, except for a few top-tier maintainers who have "tough skins". > No one should have to be the focus of a fire hose of personal verbal > abuse. I still don't see it as personal. Linus got pissed at what Mauro said and did, not at Mauro as a person. Thus, not personal. "I'm surprised to hear that kind of utter garbage from you in particular" I actually read the above as a complement. > > We're adults, not high schoolers. We can figure out how to deliver > harsh technical criticism without resorting to name calling, cussing at > people, or personal attacks. Was there name calling in the above? I missed it. > > If a maintainer is not doing their job, Linus should send them a private > harsh email, and a public email that simply says, "I'm reverting this > pull request because of X. If this continues through the next merge > window, this maintainer will need to train a replacement." Don't > publicly tear them to pieces because they made a simple mistake. That kind of email will most likely be ignored by people. A harsh email becomes popular and noticed by a larger audience. > > > The definition of insanity is repeating the same thing, over and over, > expecting the result to be different. Linus keeps repeating the same > mantras over and over to maintainers that forget rules like, "No > regressions." No, I think people have heard this. And sometimes we start to think: well this one may be different. Seems that its the maintainers that try to do the same thing over and over expecting a different result from Linus which is what makes Linus insane. > > Why aren't we trying different tactics? Why aren't we improving our > documentation so maintainers don't have to repeat themselves? There's lots of documentation, and I think its more that maintainers thinking "this time it's different" than anything else. I guarantee that Mauro will not push userspace breakage again. And because of that email, so will a lot of other maintainers. -- Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Sarah Sharp
wrote:
>
> I do, however, object when the verbal abuse shifts from being directed
> at code to being directed at *people*. For example, Linus chose to
> curse at Mauro [2] and Rafael [3], rather than their code:
Umm. Because it was actually the person who was the problem?
Trust me, there's a really easy way for me to curse at people: if you
are a maintainer, and you make excuses for your bugs rather than
trying to fix them, I will curse at *YOU*.
Because then the problem really is you.
And in *both* of the examples you cite, that was exactly the issue. It
wasn't that there was a bug - it was that the maintainer in question
basically refused to fix a regression.
Sure, there was a code problem. But that wasn't the big issue. Code
can be broken, and can be utter crap, but as long as it's fixed, who
cares?
But when top-level maintainers start ignoring the #1 rule in the
kernel ("We don't regress user space"), then it's not the broken code
that annoys me any more.
See the difference?
And yes, people who don't get this are people who I will literally
refuse to work with. In both of the cases you cite, things resolved
themselves quickly (in fact, with Rafael it was at least partially
just bad communication, and I haven't had that issue with him before).
Other people, who seem to treat regressions cavalierly, I will first
make it *very* clear that it is unacceptable, and then I will refuse
to take their patches. It has happened.
And yes, if that's the reason some person doesn't like working with
the kernel ("Linus screams at me when I break things and don't want to
fix them"), then dammit, good f*cking riddance. I already saw exactly
that comment on G+ earlier today - somebody who is well-known for not
fixing his regressions ("fix your user instead") was talking about how
he doesn't want to work with me for that very reason.
So apparently my cursing works.
Seriously, Sarah, you need to get off this "you can't curse at
people". Because you *can* curse at people, and it very much is
sometimes called for.
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 02:22:14PM +0930, Rusty Russell wrote: > Linus Torvalds writes: > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 12:17 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote: > >> > >> BTW, I was amazed that you managed to get him have a much softer tone inr > >> his last e-mail, you probably found a weakness here in his management > >> process :-) > > > > Hey, I _like_ arguing, and "cursing" and "arguing" are actually not at > > all the same thing. > > > > And I really don't tend to curse unless people are doing something > > stupid and annoying. If people have concerns and questions that I feel > > are valid, I'm more than happy to talk about it. > > > > I curse when there isn't any argument. The cursing happens for the > > "you're so f*cking wrong that it's not even worth trying to make > > logical arguments about it, because you have no possible excuse" case. > > > > .. and sometimes people surprise me and come back with a valid excuse > > after all. "My whole family died in a tragic freak accident and my > > pony got cancer, and I was distracted". > > > > And then I might even tell them I'm sorry. > > > > No. Not really. > > You have to be harsh with code: People mistake politeness for > uncertainty. Whenever I said 'I prefer if you XYZ' some proportion > didn't realize I meant 'Don't argue unless you have new facts: do XYZ or > go away.' This wastes my time, so I started being explicit. > > But be gentle with people. You've already called their baby ugly. Rusty hit the nail on the head here. I want everyone (including Linus) to be harsh with code but gentle with people. I personally don't care if emails are peppered with a little cussing. You can see I've included some words like "fuck" in my emails too. However, I object to how the cursing is *directed*. In the x86 email [1], you could argue that Linus' tone was pretty grumpy, maybe even abrasive. However, he was criticizing *code* when he cursed: "This piece-of-shit commit is marked for stable, but you clearly never even test-compiled it, did you?" "I made the mistake of doing multiple merges back-to-back with the intention of not doing a full allmodconfig build in between them, and now I have to undo them all because this pull request was full of unbelievable shit." "And why the hell was this marked for stable even *IF* it hadn't been complete and utter tripe? It even has a comment in the commit message about how this probably doesn't matter." Linus is complaining about code here, and the effects of merging bad code on his own tree. I personally have no qualms with this type of harsh email, because it focuses on the code, not the person. I do, however, object when the verbal abuse shifts from being directed at code to being directed at *people*. For example, Linus chose to curse at Mauro [2] and Rafael [3], rather than their code: "Mauro, SHUT THE FUCK UP!" "How long have you been a maintainer? And you *still* haven't learnt the first rule of kernel maintenance?" "Shut up, Mauro. And I don't _ever_ want to hear that kind of obvious garbage and idiocy from a kernel maintainer again. Seriously." "The fact that you then try to make *excuses* for breaking user space, and blaming some external program that *used* to work, is just shameful. It's not how we work." "Fix your f*cking "compliance tool", because it is obviously broken. And fix your approach to kernel programming." "Seriously. Why do I even have to mention this? Why do I have to explain this to somebody pretty much *every* f*cking merge window?" "And btw, the *reason* for that rule becoming such a hard rule was pretty much exactly suspend/resume and ACPI. Exactly because we used to have those infinite "let's fix one thing and break another" dances. So you should be well acquainted with the rule, and I'm surprised to hear that kind of utter garbage from you in particular." The personally directed verbal abuse is what I'm complaining about here. Linus goes from 0 to 11 at the drop of an "I don't think this is a regression" comment, and publicly ridicules his top maintainers. This is not right. This is not a community that people want to be a part of, except for a few top-tier maintainers who have "tough skins". No one should have to be the focus of a fire hose of personal verbal abuse. We're adults, not high schoolers. We can figure out how to deliver harsh technical criticism without resorting to name calling, cussing at people, or personal attacks. If a maintainer is not doing their job, Linus should send them a private harsh email, and a public email that simply says, "I'm reverting this pull request because of X. If this continues through the next merge window, this maintainer will need to train a replacement." Don't publicly tear them to pieces because they made a simple mistake. The definition of insanity is repeating the same thing, over and over, expecting the result to be different. Linus keeps repeating the same mantras over and over to maintainers that forget rules
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
Hi Darren, On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 08:40:15AM -0700, Darren Hart wrote: > On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 08:13 +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > > It can seem counter-producting first (as Sarah thinks) but I think that > > the competent people find their way in this simply because they're backed > > up by other ones. That's how I think we get that number of skilled people > > at the top of each subsystem. > > > > Hi Will, > > I think you've made some excellent points and have done a good job > relating the mostly digital interactions to more direct and tangible > ones. > > You have postulated (I believe) that because we have top-quality > maintainers (and I agree, we do), the process must be working. Perhaps > that was my interpretation and not your intent, but others have voiced > such opinions as well, so the following is still relevant. > > What that argument fails to take into account are the top-quality > maintainers and contributors who are not present because of the > sometimes caustic environment of Linux kernel development: "survivor's > bias". No, I'm not forgetting this, and I'm sure this is a fact. We don't have that many shy people here I think. But the question would probably better be "are the efforts and implications of adopting a softer communication worth the gain of getting a few more talented people ?". I don't have the response to this question, but for sure many things would change, some current developers would not follow, release cycles would extend, but maybe we'd get a slightly higher quality each time, who knows. Also, too shy people rarely propose improvements, even if they tend to have the greatest ideas since they spend more time thinking than talking. What I'm sure about however is that the two models are incompatible, and breaking one which works to try another one seems suicidal. And Linus would probably suggest "try it, fork the kernel, build a team and manage it your way". All in all, I think the best thing to do would be to improve the processes so that it becomes much clearer for everyone so that newcomers are less afraid of it and do less mistakes. With a smoother process we can expect a higher quality from everyone and in turn reduce the risk that Linus shouts too often. Everyone will benefit from this in the end. I'm not the best placed to propose improvements, I'm not suffering from the process, so let's hope that people who are unhappy with it will explain their concerns in great details. > There is a great article on the subject I read recently here: > > http://youarenotsosmart.com/2013/05/23/survivorship-bias/ Seems interesting but very long, I'll have to read it later ! Thanks for the link anyway. Willy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 08:13 +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > It can seem counter-producting first (as Sarah thinks) but I think that > the competent people find their way in this simply because they're backed > up by other ones. That's how I think we get that number of skilled people > at the top of each subsystem. > Hi Will, I think you've made some excellent points and have done a good job relating the mostly digital interactions to more direct and tangible ones. You have postulated (I believe) that because we have top-quality maintainers (and I agree, we do), the process must be working. Perhaps that was my interpretation and not your intent, but others have voiced such opinions as well, so the following is still relevant. What that argument fails to take into account are the top-quality maintainers and contributors who are not present because of the sometimes caustic environment of Linux kernel development: "survivor's bias". There is a great article on the subject I read recently here: http://youarenotsosmart.com/2013/05/23/survivorship-bias/ -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center Yocto Project - Linux Kernel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 08:09 -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 04:30:45PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:41 PM, Sarah Sharp > > wrote: > > > I should not have to ask for professional behavior on the mailing lists. > > > Professional behavior should be the default. > > > > So, what does "professional" mean? A professional is paid for his work, an > > amateur isn't. But this doesn't say anything about code quality, maintainer > > responsiveness, etc. > > Does it imply behavior that (hopefully) keeps getting you paid? > > I think we're getting hung up on this specific phrase. I've interpreted > this issue with lkml communication as a need to avoid bullying. I think > "no bullying", while still up for heavy interpretation, is better to > focus on than "being professional". > Agreed. The swearing will continue until code quality improves. The bit I can get behind is the avoidance of personal attacks. Some on this thread have argued that instances of such attacks are now few and far between. Is that the case? How many are we talking about? 10/day? 10/year? Is it truly only the lieutenants getting public lashings? I understand that it is the environment itself, the accepted norms, the "standard you walk past" (as Sarah has quoted) that is the real focus. So yes, let's not get hung up on professional/unprofessional or any other such subjective term or fall into the PC traps. -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center Yocto Project - Linux Kernel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 04:30:45PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:41 PM, Sarah Sharp > wrote: > > I should not have to ask for professional behavior on the mailing lists. > > Professional behavior should be the default. > > So, what does "professional" mean? A professional is paid for his work, an > amateur isn't. But this doesn't say anything about code quality, maintainer > responsiveness, etc. > Does it imply behavior that (hopefully) keeps getting you paid? I think we're getting hung up on this specific phrase. I've interpreted this issue with lkml communication as a need to avoid bullying. I think "no bullying", while still up for heavy interpretation, is better to focus on than "being professional". -Kees -- Kees Cook@outflux.net -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 16:30 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:41 PM, Sarah Sharp > wrote: > > I should not have to ask for professional behavior on the mailing lists. > > Professional behavior should be the default. > > So, what does "professional" mean? A professional is paid for his work, an > amateur isn't. But this doesn't say anything about code quality, maintainer > responsiveness, etc. > Does it imply behavior that (hopefully) keeps getting you paid? > Let me give you an example of a "professional" environment. When I use to work for a large corporation, we had one guy doing some work for us and he was rather new to our department (not new as a programmer). But I swear, I have no idea how he became a programmer, and he's been with the company for a while. He had to do a task that I was in charge of, and gave him the requirements. He just couldn't understand it. I spent a full week and a half "being nice" and going into details of what he needed to do and he got no where. Finally, as I have now gone over every aspect of what needed to be done and knew it in excruciating detail, I sat down and wrote the entire thing myself in a single day. This was something he was to do in two weeks. When my manager heard about this, she blew up and sent a very nasty email to the employee's manager, and things got really bad because of the "nastiness" of the email and not the fact that we wasted two weeks of being unproductive. That's what a professional environment gives you, and honestly, I think the Linux community can do without it. -- Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On 07/15/2013 02:07 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > 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. I have always found this to be the case. Linus has high expectations, and I think the quality of Linux code speaks volumes about the long-term effect of that. Blistering messages from Linus are directed at people who have an established reputation, but who present something less than high-caliber work. Our communication is very open and public though. Those with some experience in the community should know that these strongly-worded messages are not sent indiscriminately. This isn't obvious to a newcomer though. A stranger may not realize that the shouting is among friends who care a lot about what they're doing. If the conversation weren't so public it may not seem as inappropriate. The shaming and flaming style is effective for keeping top people in line. But it does needlessly intimidate new people in the process. -Alex -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:41 PM, Sarah Sharp
wrote:
> I should not have to ask for professional behavior on the mailing lists.
> Professional behavior should be the default.
So, what does "professional" mean? A professional is paid for his work, an
amateur isn't. But this doesn't say anything about code quality, maintainer
responsiveness, etc.
Does it imply behavior that (hopefully) keeps getting you paid?
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- ge...@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
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
Hi Neil, On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 08:40:36AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote: > On Mon, 15 Jul 2013 21:17:27 +0200 Willy Tarreau wrote: > > > Communication works two ways. > > I understand that to mean (at least) that for communication, every message > must be both sent and received. So when constructing a message, it is > important to think about how others will understand it. Yes, and I'd say that "others" here is "most of the readers". I've been using that in some large companies, sometimes people do wrong things and defend themselves of stupid choices by putting tens of people in copy to try to cover their ass. This is where I please myself. I only assemble nice words that everyone understands to build sentences that several readers will interprete with a varying degree of aggressivity. The aggressivity is at its top for the target, but non-existent for the most external readers. You end up with a person justifying him/herself in public about something apparently not existing, till the point where someone high asks "what are you talking about, care to elaborate?". You get impressive results this way, wrong projects being aborted, budgets to fix others. Not a single bad word, yet it is an extermely unpleasant experience for the target who feels naked in public and hates me. Quite frankly these persons would prefer a single hard e-mail from Linus than a week long of chess game like this. So yes, everyone's understanding is important. > On a public email list there are an awful lot of "others", and it is very > likely that any possible misunderstanding will be experienced by someone. > I think it best to minimise opportunities for misunderstanding. Yes exactly, especially for non-native readers who don't always understand some cultural jokes. There were a number of non-important jokes I didn't catch in this thread and that are not important. However generally when Linus gives someone his "appreciation" for a given work, there is very little room for misinterpretation, which is fine. He once severely scolded me on the sec list for insisting on proposing a fix for an issue I misunderstood. I had all the colorful details to understand the issue and to realize that I was lacking some skills in the specific area subject of the issue. > > Sure it can be hard for newcomers but I don't remember having read him > > scold a newcomer. > > I think that is not relevant. He is scolding people senior developers in > front of newcomers. That is not likely to encourage people to want to become > senior developers. I'm not that sure, because instead newcomers think "this guy is a bastard, I don't want to work with him, I'll work with maintainers instead". And that's what is expected. They start by focusing on a given subsystem, and as years pass, they realize that the guy with the big mouth is not that naughty, especially when he helps them design or fix their work. > Anecdote: My son (in highschool) is doing a psych assignment where he is > asking people to complete a survey which, among other things, asks about > people fear/anxiety response to various situations (it is a fairly standard > instrument I think[1]). Last few times he checked, the situation with the > highest average score was "One person bullying another". Really, it isn't > nice to watch. That's an interesting study which very likely matches reality, but here it's a bit different. The group of people is not just two guys having words together, imagine a room with hundreds or thousands of people and two in the middle fighting. They'll just get ignored by newcomers who will preferably sit down close to people who discuss calmly. I have another anecdote. A few years ago, one very discrete and respectful developer used to help me with backports of some security fixes. At some point I asked him "wouldn't you prefer to be on the sec list, it would be easier", and he replied "Linus will never accept, he once scolded me in public", and I replied "quite the opposite then, that's good for you". And when I asked, Linus said "yes of course I want him on the list, he can certainly help us". So as you see, if some people are impressed first, they can still be brought in front of the one they fear and realize that they were thinking wrong. It can seem counter-producting first (as Sarah thinks) but I think that the competent people find their way in this simply because they're backed up by other ones. That's how I think we get that number of skilled people at the top of each subsystem. And last, from some feedback I got, I would suspect that some top developers prefer one e-mail from Linus once in a while to countless e-mails from end users who repeatedly criticize their work when something does not work like they expect for whatever reasons (including PEBKAC). Best regards, Willy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
Hi Neil, On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 08:40:36AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote: On Mon, 15 Jul 2013 21:17:27 +0200 Willy Tarreau w...@1wt.eu wrote: Communication works two ways. I understand that to mean (at least) that for communication, every message must be both sent and received. So when constructing a message, it is important to think about how others will understand it. Yes, and I'd say that others here is most of the readers. I've been using that in some large companies, sometimes people do wrong things and defend themselves of stupid choices by putting tens of people in copy to try to cover their ass. This is where I please myself. I only assemble nice words that everyone understands to build sentences that several readers will interprete with a varying degree of aggressivity. The aggressivity is at its top for the target, but non-existent for the most external readers. You end up with a person justifying him/herself in public about something apparently not existing, till the point where someone high asks what are you talking about, care to elaborate?. You get impressive results this way, wrong projects being aborted, budgets to fix others. Not a single bad word, yet it is an extermely unpleasant experience for the target who feels naked in public and hates me. Quite frankly these persons would prefer a single hard e-mail from Linus than a week long of chess game like this. So yes, everyone's understanding is important. On a public email list there are an awful lot of others, and it is very likely that any possible misunderstanding will be experienced by someone. I think it best to minimise opportunities for misunderstanding. Yes exactly, especially for non-native readers who don't always understand some cultural jokes. There were a number of non-important jokes I didn't catch in this thread and that are not important. However generally when Linus gives someone his appreciation for a given work, there is very little room for misinterpretation, which is fine. He once severely scolded me on the sec list for insisting on proposing a fix for an issue I misunderstood. I had all the colorful details to understand the issue and to realize that I was lacking some skills in the specific area subject of the issue. Sure it can be hard for newcomers but I don't remember having read him scold a newcomer. I think that is not relevant. He is scolding people senior developers in front of newcomers. That is not likely to encourage people to want to become senior developers. I'm not that sure, because instead newcomers think this guy is a bastard, I don't want to work with him, I'll work with maintainers instead. And that's what is expected. They start by focusing on a given subsystem, and as years pass, they realize that the guy with the big mouth is not that naughty, especially when he helps them design or fix their work. Anecdote: My son (in highschool) is doing a psych assignment where he is asking people to complete a survey which, among other things, asks about people fear/anxiety response to various situations (it is a fairly standard instrument I think[1]). Last few times he checked, the situation with the highest average score was One person bullying another. Really, it isn't nice to watch. That's an interesting study which very likely matches reality, but here it's a bit different. The group of people is not just two guys having words together, imagine a room with hundreds or thousands of people and two in the middle fighting. They'll just get ignored by newcomers who will preferably sit down close to people who discuss calmly. I have another anecdote. A few years ago, one very discrete and respectful developer used to help me with backports of some security fixes. At some point I asked him wouldn't you prefer to be on the sec list, it would be easier, and he replied Linus will never accept, he once scolded me in public, and I replied quite the opposite then, that's good for you. And when I asked, Linus said yes of course I want him on the list, he can certainly help us. So as you see, if some people are impressed first, they can still be brought in front of the one they fear and realize that they were thinking wrong. It can seem counter-producting first (as Sarah thinks) but I think that the competent people find their way in this simply because they're backed up by other ones. That's how I think we get that number of skilled people at the top of each subsystem. And last, from some feedback I got, I would suspect that some top developers prefer one e-mail from Linus once in a while to countless e-mails from end users who repeatedly criticize their work when something does not work like they expect for whatever reasons (including PEBKAC). Best regards, Willy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:41 PM, Sarah Sharp
sarah.a.sh...@linux.intel.com wrote:
I should not have to ask for professional behavior on the mailing lists.
Professional behavior should be the default.
So, what does professional mean? A professional is paid for his work, an
amateur isn't. But this doesn't say anything about code quality, maintainer
responsiveness, etc.
Does it imply behavior that (hopefully) keeps getting you paid?
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- ge...@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
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On 07/15/2013 02:07 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: 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. I have always found this to be the case. Linus has high expectations, and I think the quality of Linux code speaks volumes about the long-term effect of that. Blistering messages from Linus are directed at people who have an established reputation, but who present something less than high-caliber work. Our communication is very open and public though. Those with some experience in the community should know that these strongly-worded messages are not sent indiscriminately. This isn't obvious to a newcomer though. A stranger may not realize that the shouting is among friends who care a lot about what they're doing. If the conversation weren't so public it may not seem as inappropriate. The shaming and flaming style is effective for keeping top people in line. But it does needlessly intimidate new people in the process. -Alex -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 16:30 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:41 PM, Sarah Sharp sarah.a.sh...@linux.intel.com wrote: I should not have to ask for professional behavior on the mailing lists. Professional behavior should be the default. So, what does professional mean? A professional is paid for his work, an amateur isn't. But this doesn't say anything about code quality, maintainer responsiveness, etc. Does it imply behavior that (hopefully) keeps getting you paid? Let me give you an example of a professional environment. When I use to work for a large corporation, we had one guy doing some work for us and he was rather new to our department (not new as a programmer). But I swear, I have no idea how he became a programmer, and he's been with the company for a while. He had to do a task that I was in charge of, and gave him the requirements. He just couldn't understand it. I spent a full week and a half being nice and going into details of what he needed to do and he got no where. Finally, as I have now gone over every aspect of what needed to be done and knew it in excruciating detail, I sat down and wrote the entire thing myself in a single day. This was something he was to do in two weeks. When my manager heard about this, she blew up and sent a very nasty email to the employee's manager, and things got really bad because of the nastiness of the email and not the fact that we wasted two weeks of being unproductive. That's what a professional environment gives you, and honestly, I think the Linux community can do without it. -- Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 04:30:45PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:41 PM, Sarah Sharp sarah.a.sh...@linux.intel.com wrote: I should not have to ask for professional behavior on the mailing lists. Professional behavior should be the default. So, what does professional mean? A professional is paid for his work, an amateur isn't. But this doesn't say anything about code quality, maintainer responsiveness, etc. Does it imply behavior that (hopefully) keeps getting you paid? I think we're getting hung up on this specific phrase. I've interpreted this issue with lkml communication as a need to avoid bullying. I think no bullying, while still up for heavy interpretation, is better to focus on than being professional. -Kees -- Kees Cook@outflux.net -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 08:09 -0700, Kees Cook wrote: On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 04:30:45PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:41 PM, Sarah Sharp sarah.a.sh...@linux.intel.com wrote: I should not have to ask for professional behavior on the mailing lists. Professional behavior should be the default. So, what does professional mean? A professional is paid for his work, an amateur isn't. But this doesn't say anything about code quality, maintainer responsiveness, etc. Does it imply behavior that (hopefully) keeps getting you paid? I think we're getting hung up on this specific phrase. I've interpreted this issue with lkml communication as a need to avoid bullying. I think no bullying, while still up for heavy interpretation, is better to focus on than being professional. Agreed. The swearing will continue until code quality improves. The bit I can get behind is the avoidance of personal attacks. Some on this thread have argued that instances of such attacks are now few and far between. Is that the case? How many are we talking about? 10/day? 10/year? Is it truly only the lieutenants getting public lashings? I understand that it is the environment itself, the accepted norms, the standard you walk past (as Sarah has quoted) that is the real focus. So yes, let's not get hung up on professional/unprofessional or any other such subjective term or fall into the PC traps. -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center Yocto Project - Linux Kernel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 08:13 +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: It can seem counter-producting first (as Sarah thinks) but I think that the competent people find their way in this simply because they're backed up by other ones. That's how I think we get that number of skilled people at the top of each subsystem. Hi Will, I think you've made some excellent points and have done a good job relating the mostly digital interactions to more direct and tangible ones. You have postulated (I believe) that because we have top-quality maintainers (and I agree, we do), the process must be working. Perhaps that was my interpretation and not your intent, but others have voiced such opinions as well, so the following is still relevant. What that argument fails to take into account are the top-quality maintainers and contributors who are not present because of the sometimes caustic environment of Linux kernel development: survivor's bias. There is a great article on the subject I read recently here: http://youarenotsosmart.com/2013/05/23/survivorship-bias/ -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center Yocto Project - Linux Kernel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
Hi Darren, On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 08:40:15AM -0700, Darren Hart wrote: On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 08:13 +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: It can seem counter-producting first (as Sarah thinks) but I think that the competent people find their way in this simply because they're backed up by other ones. That's how I think we get that number of skilled people at the top of each subsystem. Hi Will, I think you've made some excellent points and have done a good job relating the mostly digital interactions to more direct and tangible ones. You have postulated (I believe) that because we have top-quality maintainers (and I agree, we do), the process must be working. Perhaps that was my interpretation and not your intent, but others have voiced such opinions as well, so the following is still relevant. What that argument fails to take into account are the top-quality maintainers and contributors who are not present because of the sometimes caustic environment of Linux kernel development: survivor's bias. No, I'm not forgetting this, and I'm sure this is a fact. We don't have that many shy people here I think. But the question would probably better be are the efforts and implications of adopting a softer communication worth the gain of getting a few more talented people ?. I don't have the response to this question, but for sure many things would change, some current developers would not follow, release cycles would extend, but maybe we'd get a slightly higher quality each time, who knows. Also, too shy people rarely propose improvements, even if they tend to have the greatest ideas since they spend more time thinking than talking. What I'm sure about however is that the two models are incompatible, and breaking one which works to try another one seems suicidal. And Linus would probably suggest try it, fork the kernel, build a team and manage it your way. All in all, I think the best thing to do would be to improve the processes so that it becomes much clearer for everyone so that newcomers are less afraid of it and do less mistakes. With a smoother process we can expect a higher quality from everyone and in turn reduce the risk that Linus shouts too often. Everyone will benefit from this in the end. I'm not the best placed to propose improvements, I'm not suffering from the process, so let's hope that people who are unhappy with it will explain their concerns in great details. There is a great article on the subject I read recently here: http://youarenotsosmart.com/2013/05/23/survivorship-bias/ Seems interesting but very long, I'll have to read it later ! Thanks for the link anyway. Willy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 02:22:14PM +0930, Rusty Russell wrote: Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org writes: On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 12:17 PM, Willy Tarreau w...@1wt.eu wrote: BTW, I was amazed that you managed to get him have a much softer tone inr his last e-mail, you probably found a weakness here in his management process :-) Hey, I _like_ arguing, and cursing and arguing are actually not at all the same thing. And I really don't tend to curse unless people are doing something stupid and annoying. If people have concerns and questions that I feel are valid, I'm more than happy to talk about it. I curse when there isn't any argument. The cursing happens for the you're so f*cking wrong that it's not even worth trying to make logical arguments about it, because you have no possible excuse case. .. and sometimes people surprise me and come back with a valid excuse after all. My whole family died in a tragic freak accident and my pony got cancer, and I was distracted. And then I might even tell them I'm sorry. No. Not really. You have to be harsh with code: People mistake politeness for uncertainty. Whenever I said 'I prefer if you XYZ' some proportion didn't realize I meant 'Don't argue unless you have new facts: do XYZ or go away.' This wastes my time, so I started being explicit. But be gentle with people. You've already called their baby ugly. Rusty hit the nail on the head here. I want everyone (including Linus) to be harsh with code but gentle with people. I personally don't care if emails are peppered with a little cussing. You can see I've included some words like fuck in my emails too. However, I object to how the cursing is *directed*. In the x86 email [1], you could argue that Linus' tone was pretty grumpy, maybe even abrasive. However, he was criticizing *code* when he cursed: This piece-of-shit commit is marked for stable, but you clearly never even test-compiled it, did you? I made the mistake of doing multiple merges back-to-back with the intention of not doing a full allmodconfig build in between them, and now I have to undo them all because this pull request was full of unbelievable shit. And why the hell was this marked for stable even *IF* it hadn't been complete and utter tripe? It even has a comment in the commit message about how this probably doesn't matter. Linus is complaining about code here, and the effects of merging bad code on his own tree. I personally have no qualms with this type of harsh email, because it focuses on the code, not the person. I do, however, object when the verbal abuse shifts from being directed at code to being directed at *people*. For example, Linus chose to curse at Mauro [2] and Rafael [3], rather than their code: Mauro, SHUT THE FUCK UP! How long have you been a maintainer? And you *still* haven't learnt the first rule of kernel maintenance? Shut up, Mauro. And I don't _ever_ want to hear that kind of obvious garbage and idiocy from a kernel maintainer again. Seriously. The fact that you then try to make *excuses* for breaking user space, and blaming some external program that *used* to work, is just shameful. It's not how we work. Fix your f*cking compliance tool, because it is obviously broken. And fix your approach to kernel programming. Seriously. Why do I even have to mention this? Why do I have to explain this to somebody pretty much *every* f*cking merge window? And btw, the *reason* for that rule becoming such a hard rule was pretty much exactly suspend/resume and ACPI. Exactly because we used to have those infinite let's fix one thing and break another dances. So you should be well acquainted with the rule, and I'm surprised to hear that kind of utter garbage from you in particular. The personally directed verbal abuse is what I'm complaining about here. Linus goes from 0 to 11 at the drop of an I don't think this is a regression comment, and publicly ridicules his top maintainers. This is not right. This is not a community that people want to be a part of, except for a few top-tier maintainers who have tough skins. No one should have to be the focus of a fire hose of personal verbal abuse. We're adults, not high schoolers. We can figure out how to deliver harsh technical criticism without resorting to name calling, cussing at people, or personal attacks. If a maintainer is not doing their job, Linus should send them a private harsh email, and a public email that simply says, I'm reverting this pull request because of X. If this continues through the next merge window, this maintainer will need to train a replacement. Don't publicly tear them to pieces because they made a simple mistake. The definition of insanity is repeating the same thing, over and over, expecting the result to be different. Linus keeps repeating the same mantras over and over to maintainers that forget rules like, No regressions. Why aren't we trying different tactics?
