On kernel mailing list behavior [LWN.net]

On kernel mailing list behavior

Posted Jul 19, 2013 20:12 UTC (Fri) by dlang (guest, #313)
In reply to: On kernel mailing list behavior by daniel
Parent article: On kernel mailing list behavior

> maintainers should not be assigning make-work projects to active contributors.

one person's "make-work" project is another persons "critical for long term maintainability" project.

It's _very_ common for people to some to an open-source project and hand over a bunch of code to be implemented.

It's almost unheard of for the same person to be involved a decade later to fix or clarify that same code.

As a result, the maintainers (many of who _have_ been around for a long time) are FAR more concerned about maintainability issues than new contributers.

Sometimes the maintainer will do the work to convert a contribution to be more maintainable, but as Ted notes, that doesn't scale. What the maintainer needs to do is to push back on the contributer to get them to improve the submission.

In most cases, the contributer does so, and their next contribution is better (requiring less change).

Sometimes, the maintainer will ask the contributer to fix something else that the contributer sees as related to the contribution. sometimes the contributer does so and the result is much better, sometimes the contributer doesn't do so and their change goes in anyway, and other times the contributer refuses and goes away, and their change doesn't go in. All of these are acceptable results

to post comments

On kernel mailing list behavior

Posted Jul 20, 2013 7:52 UTC (Sat) by daniel (guest, #3181) [Link] (11 responses)

You are being rather presumptuous, assuming that Ted's cleanups were critical for long term maintainability.

I will give you this: Ted's legendary hack to make telldir/seekdir work was if fact critical for long term usage of HTree, or even short term usage. But I have always said that, haven't I. Now maybe you should go read Ted's telldir code, then come here and tell me more of your theories about long term maintainability. Dare you.

By the way, did you see the rule 4 above, no mobbing? Please think about how you might have worded your comment so that it does not come across as a defence of the right to abuse/harass/whatever toxic behavior LKML has earned a reputation for.

On kernel mailing list behavior

Posted Jul 20, 2013 8:20 UTC (Sat) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link] (9 responses)

you made up those rules, I never agreed to them.

By your definition, anyone who argues with you is now guilty of 'mobbing' and violating the rules. This is exactly the type of rules gamesmanship that makes people very reluctant to allow any formal rules to be defined.

As for maintainability, where there is disagreement between contributors and existing long-term maintainers (especially when there are multiple maintainers talking), the maintainers get the benefit of the doubt. They have earned it over time.

In programming and system administration, people come into existing situations and always blame the prior person for the problems they see, and for that person being short-sighted.

When a person stays in a job long enough, they look at something and have the same reaction, but then realize that they were the one responsible, and they can remember why they did things that way. After a few times of this, they get MUCH more careful about what they are willing to accept, because they realize that they will have to maintain it over the long term.

Until you've been on something long enough to be in the position of replacing your original work with the next generation (and seeing the next generation of co-workers and their reaction to your prior work), youreally don't think about maintainability in the same way.

In my case, it's system and network administration and design, for Linus and his Lieutenants, it's maintainability of the kernel code. There are a LOT of things that they did 15 years ago that they would not accept from anyone today

On kernel mailing list behavior

Posted Jul 20, 2013 8:32 UTC (Sat) by daniel (guest, #3181) [Link] (8 responses)

Feh. You are just sticking up for the current toxic culture, including mobbing. Let Ted argue his own points please. Oh wait, it was Al. Oh wait, it's a mob, including you.

Your post is full of fallacies but we already wasted enough bandwidth on this, you find them please.

On kernel mailing list behavior

Posted Jul 20, 2013 8:39 UTC (Sat) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link] (7 responses)

I actually expected you to dismiss anything that I said.

i also expect that you will dismiss anything that Ted says.

After all, anyone who doesn't agree with you must be blindly in favour of abusing people.

On kernel mailing list behavior

Posted Jul 20, 2013 8:53 UTC (Sat) by daniel (guest, #3181) [Link] (5 responses)

You posted a patronizing lecture, proceeding from an assumption that is dubious at best. Your behaviour is toxic, and you react defensively to that being pointed out, rather than doing the right thing and considering how you might become part of the solution instead of part of the problem. By the way, you never said thank you. Good night.

On kernel mailing list behavior

Posted Jul 20, 2013 13:47 UTC (Sat) by shmget (guest, #58347) [Link] (4 responses)

" Your behaviour is toxic, and you react defensively to that being pointed out, rather than doing the right thing and considering how you might become part of the solution instead of part of the problem"

Have you ever hear of that wonderful technical invention called : 'The mirror'.
you should try it one day, dear kettle.

On kernel mailing list behavior

Posted Jul 20, 2013 20:35 UTC (Sat) by daniel (guest, #3181) [Link] (3 responses)

Your behaviour is called "blaming the victim". Part of the toxic pattern.

On kernel mailing list behavior

Posted Jul 20, 2013 20:39 UTC (Sat) by daniel (guest, #3181) [Link] (2 responses)

And further, you joined in the mobbing. And also forgot to say thank you. Time to go get that mirror out.

By the way, what is your real name? Are you a kernel developer?

On kernel mailing list behavior

Posted Jul 21, 2013 0:33 UTC (Sun) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link] (1 responses)

Please just stop.

On kernel mailing list behavior

Posted Jul 21, 2013 2:35 UTC (Sun) by daniel (guest, #3181) [Link]

Et tu Bronson?

On kernel mailing list behavior

Posted Jul 22, 2013 20:05 UTC (Mon) by Baylink (guest, #755) [Link]

I've seen the behaviour Daniel is exhibiting here, before, here on LWN.

It was aimed at me, a couple years ago, in a thread also prominent for pointing me to Derailing For Dummies to acquire an education in how not to do ... something I wasn't doing in the first place.

Old timers will remember the thread; *EVERYONE* is invited not to, um, derail *this* thread into that one.

On kernel mailing list behavior

Posted Jul 20, 2013 13:44 UTC (Sat) by shmget (guest, #58347) [Link]

"By the way, did you see the rule 4 above, no mobbing?"
Now who's being presumptuous ?

"your comment so that it does not come across as a defence of the right to abuse/harass/whatever toxic behavior LKML "
Nice begging the question fallacy... but the point has not being conceded, no matter how much creative you choose to be with your vocabulary to try to pain a favorable picture of your position.