4 ms·

Profanity by itself isn't the problem. I don't have a problem with shit piss cunt fuck either. It's telling a contributor that their contributions are worthless

Profanity by itself isn't the problem. I don't have a problem with shit piss cunt fuck either. It's telling a contributor that their contributions are worthless, cannot be fixed, and other ad-hominem angry insults that just fosters a macho, jockish atmosphere in Linux that has demonstrably alienated capable contributors. I'm sorry that Sarah Sharp is no longer maintaining the USB modules because of Linus's attitude, because I've never seen anyone else who knows as much about USB as she does.

tertius 9y ago
Let's put this in a vacuum (since I'm not too familiar with the whole saga over time and I'd like to see an honest response.) > It's telling a contributor that their contributions are worthless, cannot be fixed, and other ad-hominem angry insults that just fosters a macho, jockish atmosphere in Linux that has demonstrably alienated capable contributors. I'll quote bits one at a time. > It's telling a contributor that their contributions are worthless, cannot be fixed What if they are? How do you handle the situation? > and other ad-hominem angry insults I would argue that saying some patch is worthless and cannot be fixed isn't ad-hominem. But I'd like to get your view, since it seems you've read a lot on the topic and care about the OSS community. (Edit: As an aside, my personal policy in this regard is temperance in my reaction, and this is especially easy when written.)
busterarm 9y ago
> It's telling a contributor that their contributions are worthless, cannot be fixed, and other ad-hominem angry insults that just fosters a macho, jockish atmosphere in Linux that has demonstrably alienated capable contributors. Linux is a project of such a massive scale that Linus has to accept kernel commits from circles of trust in his developer community. If someone demonstrates that they don't understand the fundamental goals of the project, and their contributions are accepted largely based on trust, then yes, their contributions are effectively worthless. They have to be moved to a further out circle and have their work filtered up through others, and you have to second guess every piece of work that they've contributed.
- tertius 9y ago
  I think you're addressing the first half of his objection to Linus' behaviour, not the second half though. I agree with you completely, but I can see how this can be accomplished, i.e. removal of trust and correction (public at that) without the need to demolish the person him/herself. I think we can both agree that it's a fine line though. Personally, "losing your temper" (i.e. something you have to apologize for later) is something that should be relegated to children. Adults should exhibit self-control in this regard. You can get the "job" done without this. Some have to work harder at it than others. But saying that it's just okay to denigrate others is not correct.
  - busterarm 9y ago
    He has lost his temper needlessly in the past and acknowledged it as something to work on and from my limited perspective it looks like he has. I don't see this particular rant in question to be a personal attack though. Personally, I don't see a macho, jockish atmosphere to the Linux kernel community either. Also, I'm also not particularly concerned whether an environment is cultivated where anyone feels they can contribute. People contribute to the kernel out of need as well as want. To directly address the part of the comment about otherwise capable contributors (and the Sarah Sharp example): There's multiple kinds of capability. Technical capability isn't the be-all, end-all in this industry. In fact, I think most of us would say that soft-skills are what differentiate high levels of success in this career. If a company's management culture disagrees with you, then you aren't capable of contributing in that atmosphere. It's not a matter of either party being to blame but a matter of fit between two parties working towards a mutual goal. I don't think it's remotely fair to say that it's solely Linus's responsibility to facilitate a culture where anyone can feel comfortable contributing. Especially with a project as fundamentally necessary where people will have to contribute, regardless of the culture. If someone's incompatibility with the culture trumps their need to work in it, then yes, they should part ways and that should be perfectly okay. The same applies to personal relationships, marriages, etc. I think it's good to step back from things from time to time and realize that, ultimately, you're dealing with people and they're not always going to value what you value and they're not always going to give you what you want. Linus is BDFL. That's all you need to know in four letters. Why are people trying to give ultimatums to God? Seems pointless.

tertius 9y ago

Let's put this in a vacuum (since I'm not too familiar with the whole saga over time and I'd like to see an honest response.) > It's telling a contributor that their contributions are worthless, cannot be fixed, and other ad-hominem angry insults that just fosters a macho, jockish atmosphere in Linux that has demonstrably alienated capable contributors. I'll quote bits one at a time. > It's telling a contributor that their contributions are worthless, cannot be fixed What if they are? How do you handle the situation? > and other ad-hominem angry insults I would argue that saying some patch is worthless and cannot be fixed isn't ad-hominem. But I'd like to get your view, since it seems you've read a lot on the topic and care about the OSS community. (Edit: As an aside, my personal policy in this regard is temperance in my reaction, and this is especially easy when written.)

busterarm 9y ago

> It's telling a contributor that their contributions are worthless, cannot be fixed, and other ad-hominem angry insults that just fosters a macho, jockish atmosphere in Linux that has demonstrably alienated capable contributors. Linux is a project of such a massive scale that Linus has to accept kernel commits from circles of trust in his developer community. If someone demonstrates that they don't understand the fundamental goals of the project, and their contributions are accepted largely based on trust, then yes, their contributions are effectively worthless. They have to be moved to a further out circle and have their work filtered up through others, and you have to second guess every piece of work that they've contributed.

tertius 9y ago
I think you're addressing the first half of his objection to Linus' behaviour, not the second half though. I agree with you completely, but I can see how this can be accomplished, i.e. removal of trust and correction (public at that) without the need to demolish the person him/herself. I think we can both agree that it's a fine line though. Personally, "losing your temper" (i.e. something you have to apologize for later) is something that should be relegated to children. Adults should exhibit self-control in this regard. You can get the "job" done without this. Some have to work harder at it than others. But saying that it's just okay to denigrate others is not correct.
- busterarm 9y ago
  He has lost his temper needlessly in the past and acknowledged it as something to work on and from my limited perspective it looks like he has. I don't see this particular rant in question to be a personal attack though. Personally, I don't see a macho, jockish atmosphere to the Linux kernel community either. Also, I'm also not particularly concerned whether an environment is cultivated where anyone feels they can contribute. People contribute to the kernel out of need as well as want. To directly address the part of the comment about otherwise capable contributors (and the Sarah Sharp example): There's multiple kinds of capability. Technical capability isn't the be-all, end-all in this industry. In fact, I think most of us would say that soft-skills are what differentiate high levels of success in this career. If a company's management culture disagrees with you, then you aren't capable of contributing in that atmosphere. It's not a matter of either party being to blame but a matter of fit between two parties working towards a mutual goal. I don't think it's remotely fair to say that it's solely Linus's responsibility to facilitate a culture where anyone can feel comfortable contributing. Especially with a project as fundamentally necessary where people will have to contribute, regardless of the culture. If someone's incompatibility with the culture trumps their need to work in it, then yes, they should part ways and that should be perfectly okay. The same applies to personal relationships, marriages, etc. I think it's good to step back from things from time to time and realize that, ultimately, you're dealing with people and they're not always going to value what you value and they're not always going to give you what you want. Linus is BDFL. That's all you need to know in four letters. Why are people trying to give ultimatums to God? Seems pointless.