8 ms·

It's very easy to armchair criticise the linux kernel, but it's surely one of the marvels of modern software engineering in terms of size, scope, usage and long

It's very easy to armchair criticise the linux kernel, but it's surely one of the marvels of modern software engineering in terms of size, scope, usage and longevity. Well done to the team.

travisgriggs 4y ago
Agreed. What amazes me is that they (and a number of other projects) do it without any traditional “management.” Sure, there might be a release manager, but it’s more like a coordinator/comptroller function. It’s just a bunch of (mostly)”let’s act like adults” sort of people, and without all of the bureaucracy that usually accompanies some of even the smallest software efforts, it just keeps going.
- imiric 4y ago
  It's inspirational, to say the least. Linux is a testament that a truly distributed team can not only work efficiently, but deliver a successful product. I'm inclined to think that it's partly because they're not chasing growth metrics, have to report to stakeholders, etc. Most companies drown in the overhead related to such processes.
  - ianlevesque 4y ago
    I don’t disagree but there are many corporate contributors who are getting paid based on the success of the optimizations and features they upstream to the kernel. At FAANG it’s the same metrics-based success you refer to.
    - cpach 4y ago
      Good point. But there’s not one such paradigm ruling the whole process of developing Linux. I guess we actually could say there are competing paradigms.
    - pmontra 4y ago
      Those corporations work together to contribute to the same open source code base and at the same time they are trying to (commercially) kill each other. Quite a wonder.
      - cpach 4y ago
        Kinda reminds me a bit of the operations of the nation states and counties of past Europe…
      - sword_smith 4y ago
        Or maybe somewhat similar to biological evolution: competition and cooperation.
    - croon 4y ago
      Sure, but if any one of those corporate contributors could merge any change they wanted into the kernel they could likely get way more "metrics" gain, but they can't, because that's not the goal of the kernel team. The gains of one corporation are secondary to the gains of everyone.
2143 4y ago
> and longevity The recent funeral of Queen Elizabeth II was an opportunity to read up on the many trivias of British royalty. (PS: the British royalty is definitely not the head of my country). One thing that struck me was that thay still have plenty of things (actual physical objects) from the middle ages that has survived to the modern day. I think it's awesome that something from the middle ages has been immaculately maintained to the modern day. So perhaps, by the time it's the year 7298 Linux kernel would still be in use, immaculately maintained over thousands of years. Wouldn't that just be great? (I wonder how intergalactic pull requests are gonna work out...)
- asddubs 4y ago
  It would be cool, but the thought of maintaining any kind of code with more than 5000 years of legacy scares me deeply
  - nkuttler 4y ago
    Keeping legacy code around is a choice.
    - Huh1337 4y ago
      Not even Pham Nuwen could avoid it... (for context, read A Deepness in the Sky - but it's better to begin with A Fire Upon the Deep)
- Aperocky 4y ago
  We're not going to be intergalactic by year 7298 for the simple fact that the Milky Way is 100000 light years across and traveling faster than light is physically forbidden
  - colordrops 4y ago
    You really think our model of reality and what is possible will apply in 5,276 years? What did we understand 5,276 years ago? Most certainly countless things that we have now would be considered impossible or witchcraft back then.
Edman274 4y ago
Does the NT kernel get the same accommodation, where we admit that despite its shortcomings, it's a marvel of software engineering?
- quotemstr 4y ago
  In informed circles, NT gets a lot of respect.
rawoke083600 4y ago
And it's done without SCRUM :D
quotemstr 4y ago
What impresses me is that the Linux kernel has maintained ABI compatibility with userspace forever. Meanwhile, people in userspace keep talking about binary compatibility as some kind of impossible unicorn of a goal and bring us terrible things to allow them to "evolve" ABIs instead of just, well, not breaking callers. I love it when Very Serious People say "X is impossible". You then show them an example of "X", and these Very Serious People hem, and haw, or rage-quit meetings, or do whatever it takes to avoid admitting that they were wrong.

It's very easy to armchair criticise the linux kernel, but it's surely one of the marvels of modern software engineering in terms of size, scope, usage and longevity. Well done to the team.

travisgriggs 4y ago

Agreed. What amazes me is that they (and a number of other projects) do it without any traditional “management.” Sure, there might be a release manager, but it’s more like a coordinator/comptroller function. It’s just a bunch of (mostly)”let’s act like adults” sort of people, and without all of the bureaucracy that usually accompanies some of even the smallest software efforts, it just keeps going.

imiric 4y ago
It's inspirational, to say the least. Linux is a testament that a truly distributed team can not only work efficiently, but deliver a successful product. I'm inclined to think that it's partly because they're not chasing growth metrics, have to report to stakeholders, etc. Most companies drown in the overhead related to such processes.
- ianlevesque 4y ago
  I don’t disagree but there are many corporate contributors who are getting paid based on the success of the optimizations and features they upstream to the kernel. At FAANG it’s the same metrics-based success you refer to.
  - cpach 4y ago
    Good point. But there’s not one such paradigm ruling the whole process of developing Linux. I guess we actually could say there are competing paradigms.
  - pmontra 4y ago
    Those corporations work together to contribute to the same open source code base and at the same time they are trying to (commercially) kill each other. Quite a wonder.
    - cpach 4y ago
      Kinda reminds me a bit of the operations of the nation states and counties of past Europe…
    - sword_smith 4y ago
      Or maybe somewhat similar to biological evolution: competition and cooperation.
  - croon 4y ago
    Sure, but if any one of those corporate contributors could merge any change they wanted into the kernel they could likely get way more "metrics" gain, but they can't, because that's not the goal of the kernel team. The gains of one corporation are secondary to the gains of everyone.

2143 4y ago

> and longevity The recent funeral of Queen Elizabeth II was an opportunity to read up on the many trivias of British royalty. (PS: the British royalty is definitely not the head of my country). One thing that struck me was that thay still have plenty of things (actual physical objects) from the middle ages that has survived to the modern day. I think it's awesome that something from the middle ages has been immaculately maintained to the modern day. So perhaps, by the time it's the year 7298 Linux kernel would still be in use, immaculately maintained over thousands of years. Wouldn't that just be great? (I wonder how intergalactic pull requests are gonna work out...)

asddubs 4y ago
It would be cool, but the thought of maintaining any kind of code with more than 5000 years of legacy scares me deeply
- nkuttler 4y ago
  Keeping legacy code around is a choice.
  - Huh1337 4y ago
    Not even Pham Nuwen could avoid it... (for context, read A Deepness in the Sky - but it's better to begin with A Fire Upon the Deep)
Aperocky 4y ago
We're not going to be intergalactic by year 7298 for the simple fact that the Milky Way is 100000 light years across and traveling faster than light is physically forbidden
- colordrops 4y ago
  You really think our model of reality and what is possible will apply in 5,276 years? What did we understand 5,276 years ago? Most certainly countless things that we have now would be considered impossible or witchcraft back then.

Edman274 4y ago

Does the NT kernel get the same accommodation, where we admit that despite its shortcomings, it's a marvel of software engineering?

quotemstr 4y ago
In informed circles, NT gets a lot of respect.

rawoke083600 4y ago

And it's done without SCRUM :D

quotemstr 4y ago

What impresses me is that the Linux kernel has maintained ABI compatibility with userspace forever. Meanwhile, people in userspace keep talking about binary compatibility as some kind of impossible unicorn of a goal and bring us terrible things to allow them to "evolve" ABIs instead of just, well, not breaking callers. I love it when Very Serious People say "X is impossible". You then show them an example of "X", and these Very Serious People hem, and haw, or rage-quit meetings, or do whatever it takes to avoid admitting that they were wrong.