LWN: Comments on "On kernel mailing list behavior"

Thick skins, and women

edeloget — Thu, 19 Dec 2013 11:32:54 +0000

Seriously ? Is that an argument?

"It is known that every single woman in the world does sandal knitting and can't program."

It's also known that every stupid man in the world think that every woman in the world does sandal knitting.

You have to understand that women doesn't threaten your manhood. In a (technical) world were women are often degraded and seen as subplayers, they have a clear right to advocate for rule changing. Just like they did in the past when they campaigned to get the right to vote. Like they did in the past to recclaim their own body. You may not like this but you're fooling yourself if you think it will not happen.

Getting your old fashionned sexist comment is just unneeded anymore. It's not women who have to adapt to a sexist world. It's the sexist world that must disapear - and hopefully, it will. Your comment just make you look like a dinosaurus who does not realize he's already out of time.

Propogation and glorification

jschrod — Tue, 06 Aug 2013 09:38:45 +0000

> Anyway, I will try to be more careful in the choice of quotes.

Please, don't.

I'm late to the discussion since I was on holidays -- but, as a paid subscriber (and a quite early one, at that), I want to add my voice that "josh" is not a representative of my view. Your quotes shows what happens "in the scene" and you should not start to filter them (and thus, your report on the reality that happens) for some perceived standard of politeness of some readers.

On kernel mailing list behavior

k8to — Mon, 29 Jul 2013 13:13:36 +0000

I meant the word itself.

Many many words can be used in ways that are workplace-unacceptable. Or even human-being-unacceptable.

Propogation and glorification

fb — Mon, 29 Jul 2013 08:59:17 +0000

FWIW, I am trying to keep away from this discussion (from what I gather I think the situation with the kernel will have to get worse before it gets better). Joining now because it is somewhat LWN related. I site a care a lot about due to its quality.

I'd like to add a +1 to that comment asking LWN to be careful in its quotes section to avoid glorifying or celebrating abusive and or rude behavior. While each and every one of those quotes had somehow a reason behind them (at least in the author's mind), giving prominence to those quotes helps IMHO reinforce the notion that such a behavior is acceptable.

I'm taking the time to mention this because LWN is great and I enjoy it a lot. It is due to LWN that I get to be pointed to quite a few excellent emails such as the one from the first quote here https://lwn.net/Articles/515867/.

On kernel mailing list behavior

nix — Sat, 27 Jul 2013 22:02:23 +0000

As with so many things it depends on the context. It is acceptable in the UK to say 'fuck' as a response cry, e.g. after you stubbed your toe (if they banned that they'd have nobody with English as their native language left that could work for them at all). It is borderline acceptable to call code fucking awful (I tended to do it as a self-deprecating joke for code I wrote myself, but even then it's best not to do it if members of high management are around as they had their senses of humour surgically removed). It is defintely not acceptable to e.g. call another person, especially a coworker and *most* especially a customer a 'useless fucker' let alone anything more severe.

So it's all contextual.

On kernel mailing list behavior

nix — Sat, 27 Jul 2013 21:59:01 +0000

So just to be clear; are you are stating that I am not entitled to comment on the matter or hold an an opinion based on not having a broader experience with the Kernel mailing list?

You are not qualified to comment because you're clearly not paying enough attention to discern which behaviours Sarah was trying to get changed, and which ones *off-list* she pointed at as examples of what she was going through as a direct result of her attempt to get those behaviours changed.

The two are not the same.

On kernel mailing list behavior

nix — Sat, 27 Jul 2013 21:57:32 +0000

Her comments all seem perfectly reasonable to *me*. But then we know from your past behaviour on any thread on LWN mentioning women in any way that you are an old-school misogynist, so I'm not surprised you can't figure out the point she's driving at.

On kernel mailing list behavior

nix — Sat, 27 Jul 2013 21:56:09 +0000

FWIW, I agree with him.

(But then the sky outside my window isn't blue. It's black.)

Not so interesting- fallacious irrelevancy

nix — Sat, 27 Jul 2013 21:55:24 +0000

So, being vicious to people in a working environment[1] is acceptable because of, uh, Van Halen and brown M&Ms, and also Navy SEALs?

Sorry, not really seeing the connection here.

[1] which has never happened anywhere I have ever worked to the degree it happens on lkml, and I worked in the City of London, a famously vicious place

On kernel mailing list behavior

mathstuf — Fri, 26 Jul 2013 22:26:04 +0000

> Linux hobbiests (not sure if that is the correct plural :S)

"hobbyists" (though most-hobby-like wouldn't be the worst addition to the dictionary).

I think you've done a much better job than I could have done at getting across my thoughts on the issue (at least the ramifications; the solution is less clear since a code of conduct is useless if it is either not enforced or an LKML-thickskins list pops up as a replacement).

On kernel mailing list behavior

k8to — Fri, 26 Jul 2013 09:52:47 +0000

Really?
I've never worked anywhere that saying 'fuck' was off limits.

On kernel mailing list behavior

stevenb — Thu, 25 Jul 2013 22:52:19 +0000

Does "wrote most of the USB3.0 code" count as "something useful to say" to you? Sarah is not just a random person sprouting a discussion on lkml, she's been around for quite some time.

As for your comment: Silly is as silly does...

On kernel mailing list behavior

nocturem — Thu, 25 Jul 2013 05:32:02 +0000

So just to be clear; are you are stating that I am not entitled to comment on the matter or hold an an opinion based on not having a broader experience with the Kernel mailing list? Please let me know I wouldn't want to have misinterpreted you on this.
I Have read the thread and I found several positions expressed ranging from the belligerent to the conciliatory and I would suspect that the resulting talk at the next Kernel Summit will be very interesting.
I notice that you surmised and interpreted my second point regarding communication in a professional setting as being an allagation that such language was being deployed directly against Sarah and others.
This was not my intended statement I was using a a deliberately extreme statement as a clear and unambiguous example of language that would be considered unacceptable in a professional environment. There are other examples of bad behavior as you have suggested and most of them would have the author facing a meeting with Human Resources in their workplace.
At no point was I directly or indirectly attempting to imply that this language was common within the Kernel development community who's discussion of their own tone has been (perhaps with some irony) cleaner than external discussions on other sites. I apologize if I had left this somewhat ambiguous my point if you did not read the tldr has been mentioned in the thread itself and that is that the tone of discussion, and this is not the overall tone or the regular day to day language used on the mailing list that I am referring to but the few odd examples that make it out into wider public circulation that should be stopped.

Linus admitted that his blast at Mauro was not his proudest moment and more tragically its one of the mmoments the Internet collectivly remembers the best.

If you are uncertain what I am getting at have a look at this: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/07/lin...

It doesn't have the full story and it doesn't have to point is that from a PR perspective the damage is done. I don't make a habit of reading the mailing list and my perspective is that of an outsider.
It should be more concerning for that very reason.

There are potentially thousands of programming students and Linux hobbiests (not sure if that is the correct plural :S) who may have seen this as their only insight into the Kernel development community and further there are untold hardware manufacturers whose executive team need only to read one article like this to discourage any interest in associaing with Linux they will just stick to Microsoft cause its safe.

There is grander damage being done to the image of Linux as a whole when this gets dragged out onto the wider internet. And if you read the comments being generated on other sites regarding Linus they are not flattering or accurate but they dont have to be to tarnish the image of Linix as a whole or to scare off potential talent.

So to reiterate I am all for a code of conduct preferably with a nice fluff article in other news pages alluding to it so that instead of the perception of Linux Kernel development being an amateur project filled with flaming and hostile to newcomers it might leave this event with the image of having "cleaned up its act" regardless of its accuracy.

I was open and honest prefacing my opinion as not being intimately informed and would not claim to have years of experience with the community however I have read related articles on several other sites and I am not alone in my position which I feel validates it to a degree.

On kernel mailing list behavior

dlang — Thu, 25 Jul 2013 03:54:17 +0000

you started off by saying that you didn't read the kernel list, so you don't really know what you're talking about.

Then you imply that language like calling her "a useless cunt" is part f what's going on, and may even be common.

I have never seen language like that on the kernel list in the 16+ years that I've been reading it, and it's definantly not the time tof thing that's being discussed.

Please go and read the examples of the "bad behavior" and then look at the context before you make any comments

On kernel mailing list behavior

nocturem — Wed, 24 Jul 2013 10:17:14 +0000

Preamble:
I should probably get this out of the way here.
I am not a regular reader of the Kernel Mailing List and I don’t develop for the Linux Kernel in a professional or amateur role and I couldn’t imagine wanting to it looks more like a religious self flagellating kind of thing, spending hours coding a patch submitting it and getting ragged on because someone else doesn’t like it. However I have an interest in Linux as an admin and I take an enthusiast view towards watching its development. But seeing this kind of public behaviour makes me ashamed of the code in my PC in the same way I would feel bad knowing that my clothes were made by children in a sweatshop.
I personally have to say the most fascinating part of this entire fight has not been Sarah or Linus, it would be the bizarre arguments expressed supporting or rebutting the claim of whether there should be a code of conduct within the Kernel Mailing List.
The first observation I would make is that these interactions would probably not occur in real life ie somewhere away from the safety of a keyboard.
I sincerely doubt Linus would start disparaging the ancestry of a guy twice his size in a pub that spilt his pint. If he did; well Linux may not have a benevolent dictator maintaining the Kernel by the end of the interaction :P

As a follow up point; I can also say with some confidence that this behaviour would not occur in a professional environment in *most* businesses, not without significant consequences. Can anyone remember a time when they were allowed to call their co-workers a useless cunt? No and neither can I and it doesn’t matter how badly they have messed up. Workplaces have liability if their senior staff abuse their junior staff or vice versa (at least in any way that can be proven) and there are many, many lawsuits that have been filed for those reasons and Human Resources in any company you can think of will have policies regarding conduct between employees.
Oh I am sure there are exceptions and being the internet someone will no doubt cite them so let me head off the few I can think of:
Perhaps in the armed forces where lives are at stake you might be able to carelessly toss around the abuse but in context you are employed to kill people there so perhaps that might be an exception to a generalize rule of civility.
Yes in an impoverished 3rd world nation where much of the population is starving I am sure your manager can say whatever he likes about the quality of the shoes you are manufacturing and possibly even beat you if they are not up to Nike standard but again not a very good apples to apples comparison to the world of free and open source software development.

Secondly to all those who have made the most tragically weak apology for Linus’s behaviour that it preserves the delicate quality of Kernel code or even weaker that it reduces redundant traffic in the mailing list that ladies and gentlemen is a horrific fallacy with no supporting evidence.
There is no historical proof that abusive and ultimately childish behaviour and an inability to control your emotional state when talking to volunteers on a project improves the quality of the results. None, no I don’t care about that one time you observed it helped in one case that is anecdotal not empirical and not submissible as evidence.
I am of the opinion that if there is an issue of low quality patches being pushed through still after several years of Linus and others casting aspersions upon others intellect, breeding and bedroom preferences threatening them with beatings that they could never hope to carry out then I think the evidence would be closer to suggesting these practices haven’t worked as a code quality improver at all.
I can see no reason that you could not be direct in telling someone that their code doesn’t meet a standard that you are willing to accept but telling them that it is shit or stupid or that they themselves are morons not only insults them but has insulted their work too. Work that they may have put time into and further you should not make assumptions about the reasons as to why they have produced code not up so standard but you can ask if they are willing to re-write the code to a level you would accept.

Thirdly Linux is a free project the people submitting patches do not get paid for their work and hence it is the proverbial gift horse, you shouldn’t look it in the mouth and even if you don’t think it is a stallion you would ride at best you might turn the gift away and suggest that you would rather walk insulting the man or woman who has made this offer only increases the chance that it will not be offered in the future. Yes some companies are paying staff to develop for Linux but not a lot and most of them only have devoted small amounts of their resources to this effort since the gain in market share is tiny.
A little reality check; there is a very good reason that many hardware vendors don’t play with Linux, it has a tiny market share and can’t justify subjecting their staff to the poor attitude within the Kernel development community. There is no business case in saying: “because it is a better developed and maintained kernel than the abomination that Redmond has vomited into the world” The market has never cared about quality of code and businesses largely don’t either. Linux needs a much larger market share to swing its weight around and largely thanks to Android it is beginning to gain that. But it is still a drop in the ocean compared to Microsoft and hardware vendors still treat it accordingly.
It may help if the Kernel community was extending the olive branch towards hardware vendors and asking nicely for them to produce drivers or at least make available the documentation required for the community to take an informed stab at it ie ATI but if the attitude of the top Kernel developers is still aggressive, confrontational and generally insulting then I can’t exactly hold it against hardware vendors that they don’t feel compelled to try and get their drivers into the Kernel.

For the TLDR summary:
Linux is shooting itself in the foot with this childish attitude, its an operating system not a tree house and the only people who are hurt by a lack of vendor support and interest is the users. I am all for a code of conduct that requires Kernel maintainers to try playing nice with the patch developers.

On kernel mailing list behavior

Baylink — Tue, 23 Jul 2013 16:10:41 +0000

Yeah, no. See, at this point, I have to dismiss you as not living in a world where the sky color is blue.

On kernel mailing list behavior

shmget — Tue, 23 Jul 2013 15:27:41 +0000

"I also got some really awful hate mail that tried to drag my gender in. But I don’t think this is a gendered topic..."
" I think that my perspective is somewhat colored by both my gender and my age. A lot of the kernel maintainers came into Linux at the very beginning when there weren’t a lot of women in there."
"So I think they picked up a little bit of the brogrammer culture"

I find it fascinating how some people seems to be perfectly able to apply logic when they write code, and yet seemingly oblivious to it in their real life...

discriminations

shmget — Tue, 23 Jul 2013 14:52:47 +0000

"you'll probably be able to find examples of (1); but the “private club” defence wouldn't hold for commercial operations and is just there to discourage complaints"

Really ? there is no women-only gyms ? or do you mean they are 'illegal' ?

" As far as most scouting activities splitting children by gender, local organisations do accept both genders and give them equal treatment."

Separate but equals... hum.. where did I heard that before ... ? ah! yes.. "Plessy v. Ferguson"

On kernel mailing list behavior

josh — Tue, 23 Jul 2013 04:42:01 +0000

We're not talking about "what would rise to the level of a prosecutable threat"; that's a strawman, and nobody in this entire discussion would begin to think *that* of any mail in this LKML discussion.

We're talking about the suggestion that a kernel developer should flame people more to become more intimidating, by analogy with physical intimidation. *That's* what kicked this whole thing off.

On kernel mailing list behavior

Baylink — Mon, 22 Jul 2013 23:45:24 +0000

Oh, sure.

But the continuum above and below "reasonable threat" is so well established that it's established *in US Law*: "assault" is what happens when someone makes a threat against you which a reasonable man would construe as a valid threat.

If that midget who punched people's crotches on Scrubs threatened Arnold Schwarzenegger, that wouldn't be an assault, legally. The reverse would. It's what the Russians call "objective circumstances".

A "reasonable person" as the law defines that, and as case law from judges and juries illustrates it, would not construe the comments made about Greg KH as reasonable threats, even in the abstract (as opposed to their being aimed at a particular person *by* Greg), absent a pretty clear indication that Greg has a violent nature and is prone to go about "squishing" people.

So, out here in the Real World, no, it is not in fact reasonable to construe that entire conversation as violence, discussions of or incitement to violence, or anything near it, and the law -- and the reasonable man -- will construe you as a crank if you do.

If Greg KH *said that to Sarah*, *as a total stranger*, it would of course be a completely different situation. But the situation which pertains here would, I think, get an DA yelled at for even filing it, assuming her boss would allow her to. (See, there's no way in English for me to make the boss female too, to complete my point.)

Finally: by going off on a rant about this particular issue in this particular context, Ms Sharp is doing no favors to the people who *are* on the reasonable-person side of the divide; viz all the convention-harassment issues that are presently big topics for discussion on the Net.

Alas, I fear, this conversation -- the whole page of it -- will ultimately prove mostly fruitless as -- as with so many such arguments -- the two sides can't even agree on what the topic is.

On kernel mailing list behavior

josh — Mon, 22 Jul 2013 23:17:44 +0000

That's exactly the issue. And the non-joking point of Linus's mail was precisely to draw a parallel between physical intimidation and mailing-list intimidation, by arguing that Greg should flame people to make himself more intimidating, less approachable, and less of a "doormat". That non-joking point kicked off this whole discussion.

On kernel mailing list behavior

price — Mon, 22 Jul 2013 22:50:09 +0000

Well, let's be clear here. As I wrote, the article invited readers to infer that Sarah invented talk of physical violence. I.e., that she imagined that there had been some such talk when there hadn't been.

But, in fact, she quoted Linus saying that Greg "*should* scare [people]", because he is "a freakish giant" who "might squish you". Now, I think this is clearly a joke, and you might argue any number of other claims to the effect that it is obviously a joke, or all in good fun, or the violence it jokes about is relatively mild, or that the other messages in the thread were strictly about words, etc. But no matter how you feel about jokes about physical violence, it doesn't make them not about physical violence.

On kernel mailing list behavior

Baylink — Mon, 22 Jul 2013 22:11:51 +0000

If you would like to see the article that invites the reader to misjudge what's going on here, that's the one that drew my attention to the issue, Bob mcMillan's piece in Wired today:

http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2013/07/sarah_sharp/

On kernel mailing list behavior

Baylink — Mon, 22 Jul 2013 22:10:00 +0000

> As for the substance of this particular mistake, I think josh's detailed sibling comment explains it well. I think Linus was clearly joking too, but there's a difference between "complained about a joke" and "invented talk of physical violence that just wasn't there". You've invited readers to infer that Sarah did the latter (and several comments show that readers have), and that's not accurate or fair.

For the record, Price, I drew that inference, and it was from the clear text of the message, not because anyone invited me to.

Not so interesting- fallacious irrelevancy

Baylink — Mon, 22 Jul 2013 20:45:10 +0000

( for the people for whom kernel code is more interesting than pop culture:

In his autobiography _Crazy From The Heat_, David Lee Roth explains why the touring rider for Van Halen's first big 24-semitrailer stadium tour included, buried down around item 126 or so, something like "a bowl of M&M's in the dressing room reception area, with no brown M&Ms".

The *reason* for this item, which looked pretty goofy, and of which much light and fuss was made when it leaked to the public -- and which the band never admitted to at the time, *because it would then stop working* -- was that theirs was the first tour with lots of really heavy equipment rigged way up over top of tens of thousands of audience members, and they were thoughtful enough to realize that if they killed a substantial number of those because someone had not done their job properly, no one would ever do that kind of tour again -- quite aside from it ending their careers and possibly putting them up for manslaughter charges.

So they put the Brown M&M rule in the rider, and that gave them an easy way to check whether the promoter had properly read the rider, and implemented everything on it. They did, in fact, once come in and find brown M&Ms in the bowl, and they stopped everything and did a full inspection of the rig... and as I remember it, did find some dangerous practices, which they had corrected before showtime.

So things like that may in fact have non-obvious but desirable side effects, which drive why they exist. If you need more on this, go watch GI Jane, and find out how hard it is to become a SEAL. And why. And think about how many places the Linux kernel is now. And how many places it's going. )

Ingo posted a very interesting message on this thread

Baylink — Mon, 22 Jul 2013 20:36:55 +0000

Thank you thank you *thank you* dlang.

On kernel mailing list behavior

Baylink — Mon, 22 Jul 2013 20:32:59 +0000

Definitely, the Hawthorne Effect will likely kick in here, as much as people will say that it won't.

> I understood the claim to be that Linus will sometimes, not often, go over a line with publicly dressing down contributions that he doesn't like.

You understood her complaint to be specific to Linus? Cause I didn't. It sounded to *me* like she was asserting that the LKML in general was a "hostile work environment".

On kernel mailing list behavior

raven667 — Mon, 22 Jul 2013 20:27:25 +0000

> "Most of the people on LKML are abusive assholes", which is the substance of her complaint as I -- and a lot of other people, apparently -- are interpreting it, is an extraordinary claim.

That would be an extraordinary claim but I don't think that is not how I interpreted it and so I don't think that is the claim which was made. I understood the claim to be that Linus will sometimes, not often, go over a line with publicly dressing down contributions that he doesn't like. It is not clear to me what the relationship between Linus and the people being publicly berated is but it can set a tone on the list where that kind of behavior is considered acceptable. There are many maintainers on LKML and elsewhere in the professional sphere who are able to manage people, provide constructive feedback and maintain high quality standards without resorting to name calling and rude behavior.

I dunno, I think that the act of just talking about it probably will make the various actors think a little bit more about what they say and what the audience is when they say it which might move the conversation a few notches over in civility which would be mission accomplished from Sarah's perspective.

On kernel mailing list behavior

Baylink — Mon, 22 Jul 2013 20:05:05 +0000

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

Baylink — Mon, 22 Jul 2013 19:22:50 +0000

Nope; extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

"Most of the people on LKML are abusive assholes", which is the substance of her complaint as I -- and a lot of other people, apparently -- are interpreting it, is an extraordinary claim.

In other news: Linus and the, oh, top 10 or 12 guys on that list *are*, plus or minus 10%, the close friends between whom you believe such a tone might be justified.

There is, as you suggest, room for difference of opinion on whether the behaviour perceived on LMKL a) is common, b) actually is abusive, and c) is thereby *inherently* inclined to scare off people with useful contributions to make at that level (which is *really* far up in the stratosphere; think about the literally billions of devices the Linux kernel presently runs).

The opinion seems to be (from this thread, anyway) close enough to 50/50 that I'd have to sit down and actually tally it. But it also seems to me that the people alleging it's not abuse are backing up their position with more data and less emotion.

I *am* pleased to hear that, with one or two small exceptions, no one seems to be reacting to Sarah a) on the grounds of her sex, or b) on the grounds of her technical competence -- only, like my response, on the grounds of her management competence, which is *clearly* (to me, anyway) in-scope for this discussion.

On kernel mailing list behavior

raven667 — Mon, 22 Jul 2013 18:36:42 +0000

> *the sort of abuse she implies simply isn't happening*. Or at least, no one's demonstrated it to *me*.

We can certainly have an honest difference of opinion on that subject, I don't follow LKML so take my opinion for what it's worth, I'm just going by what I've read, but she did provide some examples of what she thought was unnecessary behavior, calling other kernel developers incompetent and stupid, telling them to SHUT THE F**K UP, etc. The tenor used between close friends may not be appropriate when used publicly with what are effectively subordinates, co-workers and strangers. The community on LKML are not just people shooting the breeze, they are largely paid professionals whose livelihood depends on their successful participation, which changes the standard a little bit. Since she did make a statement about this behavior I would extend her the respect of taking her statement at face value unless it is shown to be false.

On kernel mailing list behavior

Baylink — Mon, 22 Jul 2013 18:08:29 +0000

Certainly, but you, like Sarah, are assuming the consequent: *the sort of abuse she implies simply isn't happening*. Or at least, no one's demonstrated it to *me*.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, and all workplaces have standards and practices. If you walk in cold, and say "y'all are doing it wrong", you need a) a much better sales pitch and b) much better evidence than I have seen so far.

This is nothing more than the standards that kept Usenet useful for over 2 decades: be a grownup, and if you're gonna say dumb stuff, make sure your Nomex undies are zipped up first.

On kernel mailing list behavior

raven667 — Mon, 22 Jul 2013 17:52:51 +0000

> I'm going to assume Sarah has never been in management.

I don't know Sarah but I wouldn't assume that.

> ... hardass about people and their habits and what you will allow and what exceptions you will make

I don't believe anyone, including Sarah, is advocating for reducing the quality standards of the kernel.

> ... management's all being done in public ...
> ... management in traditional corporations ... is this raw, or worse, ...

While this surely happens I don't think this is as common, required or ideal. Companies with management who abuse and berate employees often end up with high turnover and stories on thedailywtf.com, not with high-quailty output. As Sarah pointed out, over 80% of kernel developers are employed in a professional capacity to do kernel development, so while everyone wants to retain the frank exchange of ideas that fosters quality, we can probably have some minimum standard of behavior that most corporations are able to maintain.

Acting decent toward your fellow human beings and co-workers shouldn't be a significant burden.

On kernel mailing list behavior

Baylink — Mon, 22 Jul 2013 17:32:29 +0000

> 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.

Really?

*THIS* is what set Sarah Sharp off? Then the problem is even worse than I'd imagined from the fact-free Wired article I read earlier.

The kernel is big. Really big. I mean, you might think it's a long way from one end of the PHP sources to the other, but that's just peanuts to the kernel.

And there are *lots* of people working on it.

I'm going to assume Sarah has never been in management. If she had, she would realize that there is an absolute limit to the size of a team you can manage without having to become somewhat -- or more than somewhat -- of a hardass about people and their habits and what you will allow and what exceptions you will make... and that's all we're seeing here.

Linus, having been at this for 25 years, simply doesn't sugar coat things, and since the management's all being done in public, you *see* that. I guarantee you, 2nd and 3rd tier management in traditional corporations, overseeing hundreds of professionals, is this raw, or worse, it's just that its in private, and you don't get to see it.

But no, this *particular* incident is an overreaction.

Perhaps it's a straw, and Sarah is a camel, but -- while I don't follow LKML in realtime -- I do look in on it occasionally for various reasons, and I can't say I've ever seen anything that qualifies as *abuse*.

I've myself gotten into it with Linus on that list once, and his reply didn't constitute abuse, either.

On kernel mailing list behavior

bfields — Mon, 22 Jul 2013 14:47:49 +0000

The problem wasn't that Greg didn't "rant and rave" before, but rather (as far as I can tell) that he didn't say anything at all.

On kernel mailing list behavior

bfields — Mon, 22 Jul 2013 14:46:23 +0000

There is a lot of middle ground between "people should shout as loud as they like and nobody should complain about it", and "nobody should say anything that might offend anyone".

There are cultures where you are not supposed to criticize anything publicly - at least not directly. Should we all stop using word "no" on mailing lists to not offend such people?

I can say "no" in this case while also believing Sarah's request is reasonable. I don't see any contradiction.

On kernel mailing list behavior

fuhchee — Mon, 22 Jul 2013 01:00:10 +0000

It'd be tragic if the reason Sarah spoke that way in this thread was to try to fit in more with the coarse language already deployed nearby.

On kernel mailing list behavior

lacos — Mon, 22 Jul 2013 00:09:42 +0000

Oh it's very convenient to chalk up Jon's response to US culture. Your ridiculously "butch" comment was not one bit more welcomed by this male reader from Central Europe.

Reasoning for basic human dignity is clearly an uphill battle when not even

USB XHCI DRIVER
M: Sarah Sharp <sarah.a.sharp@linux.intel.com>
L: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org
S: Supported
F: drivers/usb/host/xhci*
F: drivers/usb/host/pci-quirks*

suffices for people like you not to call another person "some skirt".

> something that works just fine for most of us

Y'all simply don't know about most of those for whom this attitude doesn't work. Of course you don't care, but that doesn't make this argument any less invalid. You're only saying "people who put up with the abuse (or don't perceive it as such) put up with it (or don't perceive it as such)".

On kernel mailing list behavior

daniel — Sun, 21 Jul 2013 20:26:54 +0000

I know that Ted, and that can be plainly seen from my post. You should also realize that I consider your "cleanups" purely cosmetic, however I would never dream of claiming that you should not have done it. It made you happy, you see. It was pointless to me, since I regarded the original as well within the bounds of what any professional ought to be able to read without effort.

Maybe I am wrong about that. However if you want to see a lot of long functions, go read the FreeBSD code. Same type of subsystem. Multi-hundred like functions everywhere you look. They like it that way. I like it either way: I am generally more concerned about the substance.

Taste is very much subjective. If you want to exercise yours in the subsystem you maintain, then by all means do so. That is your business, not mine. If you do exercise your taste, you can do so in a polite way.

Anyway, it is clear that we differ. I am saying, clearly cosmetic, you are saying fundamental. Well, the great thing is, you were able to change it so you were happy. Why you were berating me then, and still are now, is beyond me. Now we as a community have put a word to such behaviour: toxic. And you are not by any means a prominent offender. This is a great time to sit back, take a deep breath, and ask yourself why you felt compelled to act that way, and why you feel compelled to defend it now. I am telling you it is harmful and hurtful, you respond by doing it more. It is not even the real you, this is something more akin to road rage, the main difference being "behind a keyboard" as opposed to "behind a steering wheel".

On kernel mailing list behavior

hirnbrot — Sun, 21 Jul 2013 19:42:04 +0000

I agree that when it's not important you should leave it out - however, languages being what they are, it sometimes flows better _with_ gender than without (e.g. singular "they" being somewhat uncommon).

However, I was just talking about that one particular comment, and having read the other comments by that particular person in this thread, it's very clearly a case of sex- and/or troll-ism.