5 ms·

Yikes, I guess I’m way too sensitive to ever be a kernel dev. Kent seems way out of line. “Direct” is one thing, telling a maintainer they have no idea what th

Yikes, I guess I’m way too sensitive to ever be a kernel dev. Kent seems way out of line. “Direct” is one thing, telling a maintainer they have no idea what they’re talking about is another. It’s totally uncalled for. Are they trying to imitate Linus, or something? Sorry, you don’t get a license to be an asshole until you literally invent Linux.

cwillu 3y ago
Dunno, having read through the rest of the thread, and knowing some of the history, I can see why some frustration leaked out. Worth noting that they were able to pretty much immediately work together after this to come up with what appears to be a good solution to satisfy everyone.
Vogtinator 3y ago
> Sorry, you don’t get a license to be an asshole until you literally invent Linux. That doesn't grant you a license either.
coldtea 3y ago
It's a mindset from a previous era, when there were blunt thick-skinned hackers and not snowflake "I'll report it to the HR" types
- cmrdporcupine 3y ago
  I've worked through both eras, and I'll take the latter and enjoy the higher productivity and job satisfaction from everyone involved, thank you.
- bastawhiz 3y ago
  Where I'm from, having a temper tantrum on a mailing list because you're not getting your way is what makes you the snowflake. If you don't want to follow the code of conduct, you can submit your patch to a kernel without one.
  - coldtea 3y ago
    Yes, that's the new mindset, about "codes of conduct" and such. It's what happens after a project has been bookstrapped, succesful, and established, and the later process-focused/bureucracy/ass-saving/touchy-feely minded people come in. For Linux that was 15+ years after it started, did fine, and conquered the world, without needing one.
    - cwillu 3y ago
      Worth noting that it also worked fine in this instance, the two parties that were in conflict worked things out and found a better solution, and the snowflake who brought up the code-of-conduct was treated as network damage and routed around. It's vital to pay attention to the sheer volume of comments being made that all needed to be substantively responded to by one developer. The sense I get is very much that the appropriate attitude is: don't join the dog-pile if you don't want to be snapped at.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

cwillu 3y ago

Dunno, having read through the rest of the thread, and knowing some of the history, I can see why some frustration leaked out. Worth noting that they were able to pretty much immediately work together after this to come up with what appears to be a good solution to satisfy everyone.

Vogtinator 3y ago

> Sorry, you don’t get a license to be an asshole until you literally invent Linux. That doesn't grant you a license either.

coldtea 3y ago

It's a mindset from a previous era, when there were blunt thick-skinned hackers and not snowflake "I'll report it to the HR" types

cmrdporcupine 3y ago
I've worked through both eras, and I'll take the latter and enjoy the higher productivity and job satisfaction from everyone involved, thank you.
bastawhiz 3y ago
Where I'm from, having a temper tantrum on a mailing list because you're not getting your way is what makes you the snowflake. If you don't want to follow the code of conduct, you can submit your patch to a kernel without one.
- coldtea 3y ago
  Yes, that's the new mindset, about "codes of conduct" and such. It's what happens after a project has been bookstrapped, succesful, and established, and the later process-focused/bureucracy/ass-saving/touchy-feely minded people come in. For Linux that was 15+ years after it started, did fine, and conquered the world, without needing one.
  - cwillu 3y ago
    Worth noting that it also worked fine in this instance, the two parties that were in conflict worked things out and found a better solution, and the snowflake who brought up the code-of-conduct was treated as network damage and routed around. It's vital to pay attention to the sheer volume of comments being made that all needed to be substantively responded to by one developer. The sense I get is very much that the appropriate attitude is: don't join the dog-pile if you don't want to be snapped at.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]