"reviewing by proxy" [LWN.net]

"reviewing by proxy"

Posted Oct 6, 2015 7:45 UTC (Tue) by tzafrir (subscriber, #11501)
In reply to: "reviewing by proxy" by fuhchee
Parent article: Sharp: Closing a door

But aren't there such examples already?

A reply to the original post mentioned Linaro. What about various subsystem mailing lists and trees? Do all of them follow the main LKML standard here? From previous discussions I vaguely recall that no. So do such "different" subsystems have better development performance? Easier to attract new developers? Easier to keep developers?

And no, the fact that certain 4 people left citing this issue is can hardly be considered a trend - it's still closer to an anecdote. They may have had various other reasons to leave. They might have left even if the LKML was managed differently. Or maybe (pure speculation, just to be the devil's advocate. Because I have no data) applying such a code of conduct may have prolonged useless arguments in the list and thus eventually caused various people to give up as they can't get over the "red tape" needed to contribute

to post comments

"reviewing by proxy"

Posted Oct 6, 2015 12:43 UTC (Tue) by pizza (subscriber, #46) [Link]

> applying such a code of conduct may have prolonged useless arguments in the list and thus eventually caused various people to give up as they can't get over the "red tape" needed to contribute.

FWIW, this has happened to me a few times, in both F/OSS circles and professional employment -- Where the "process" (official or unofficial) ends up overshadowing the software itself.

I find it incredibly demoralizing, and, at least for me, is the best way to ensure I will find something else to do with my time.

"reviewing by proxy"

Posted Oct 6, 2015 13:41 UTC (Tue) by louie (guest, #3285) [Link] (3 responses)

"They may have had various other reasons to leave."

Except, you know, several of them had *explicitly said* that's why they stopped contributing to the kernel.

"reviewing by proxy"

Posted Oct 7, 2015 5:51 UTC (Wed) by tzafrir (subscriber, #11501) [Link] (2 responses)

People may be upset for various reasons and I don't fully trust their subjective report on that. However, that's not my main point.

The kernel development is alive and well. People occasionally come and go. Thus the fact that certain people left due to some reason is not meaningful enough. We all know that if it ainn't broken you should not fix it. I was hoping for someone to reply with an example of a subsystem mailing list that behaves differently, to allow comparing. However, no one gave that reply so we're left with baseless arguments.

"reviewing by proxy"

Posted Oct 7, 2015 13:23 UTC (Wed) by Wol (subscriber, #4433) [Link]

> I was hoping for someone to reply with an example of a subsystem mailing list that behaves differently, to allow comparing.

I'm on the linux raid mailing list. I've yet to see Neil Brown foulmouthing anyone ... it's a very well-behaved list ...

Cheers,
Wol

"reviewing by proxy"

Posted Oct 7, 2015 14:34 UTC (Wed) by malor (guest, #2973) [Link]

>We all know that if it ainn't broken you should not fix it

Losing strong developers for bad reasons is pretty broken.