Bad things may happen if Linus gives a right of making decision to
other people (a big group of people). ;)
As you said, Linux is a public OS, so Con's code never will be lost.
That's the base of open source - people come and go, but the code
stays. :)
2007/8/3, Oleksandr Natalenko <[email protected]>:
> Question is not only in CFS vs SD, but in -ck patchset. Linus must remember
> that he has lost nice code and nice maintainer, and it's not a right decision.
> Linux is a public OS, so let people decide themselves, but not Linus himself.
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
This is re-post of personal mail to Olexander.
--
Wbr, Andriy Mishkovskyy.
He's got a heart of a little child, and he keeps it in a jar on his desk.
On Friday 03 August 2007 14:27:30 Андрій Мішковський wrote:
> Bad things may happen if Linus gives a right of making decision to
> other people (a big group of people). ;)
> As you said, Linux is a public OS, so Con's code never will be lost.
> That's the base of open source - people come and go, but the code
> stays. :)
Unfortunately Con undermined this by leaving all kernel development. So unless
somebody else is sufficiently motivated to constructively improve SD (and I
think we all hope they will, competition is good), it will probably die.
--
Cheers,
Alistair.
137/1 Warrender Park Road, Edinburgh, UK.
> I'm not going to argue with this point because I think this is exactly what
> Linus meant. He wanted a scheduler that worked. And he knew it wouldn't work
> immediately after merging it. So he had to go with the person that he trusted
> the most to make it work, quickly. And this was Ingo. That might not be
> a "purely" technical reason, but I suspect it's a correct one.
You're demonstrating a lack of reason here. In the same post Linus
said repeatedly that he feels Con isn't someone he wanted to work with
because he felt Con refused to listen to bug reports and was
argumentative. And never once did Linus say that CFS would work out
of the box. He said it was new code that needs plenty of testing. In
fact he said that is why he was against plugsched, because if people
ran different schedulers, then CFS would get less testing. You're
just putting motives in Linus' mouth that weren't there to begin with.
He picked a person over a piece of code, and his reasoning for picking
a person was flawed. By Linus' own statements we should choose a
person who has demonstrated they could support scheduler code for
years. Con did exactly that, where as Ingo said he never imagined
he'd write a scheduler. Linus made up some bogus accusations about
Con and that isn't cool. I'm not sure why anyone would argue this
point. Attacking volunteers in a volunteer project is just bad form,
and my entire purpose of ever writing this list that already gets far
too much traffic is to voice my displeasure in exactly this matter.
I've always respected Linus despite his many public disputes.
Generally he argues his point gruffly, but he has reason and logic on
his side. Here he has a personal grudge, and the community is weaker
now because of it.
> Who cares? You can't say either Linus or Ingo are any worse in this regard, so
> it's irrelevant when discussing why SD wasn't chosen. This is just as
> political as anything negative that Linus said.
I imagine if it was your pet project, and you were trampled on in this
manner, you'd care. And I don't like seeing people abused like this.
I also don't care to see a project I care about weakened due to petty
drama and politics. I had hoped the Linux community was above this.
Your lack of compassion in the matter however is duly noted. We have
polar views and aren't going to agree.
I'll leave it at that.
-- T. J. Brumfield
"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of
people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
--Douglas Adams
"Nihilism makes me smile."
--Christopher Quick
On Friday 03 August 2007 15:51:59 T. J. Brumfield wrote:
> > I'm not going to argue with this point because I think this is exactly
> > what Linus meant. He wanted a scheduler that worked. And he knew it
> > wouldn't work immediately after merging it. So he had to go with the
> > person that he trusted the most to make it work, quickly. And this was
> > Ingo. That might not be a "purely" technical reason, but I suspect it's a
> > correct one.
>
> You're demonstrating a lack of reason here. In the same post Linus
> said repeatedly that he feels Con isn't someone he wanted to work with
> because he felt Con refused to listen to bug reports and was
> argumentative.
Which is refuted only by your personal experience, not by any facts that have
yet been posted.
> And never once did Linus say that CFS would work out
> of the box. He said it was new code that needs plenty of testing. In
> fact he said that is why he was against plugsched, because if people
> ran different schedulers, then CFS would get less testing. You're
> just putting motives in Linus' mouth that weren't there to begin with.
This has gone too far. I said NO such thing. I repeatedly stated in previous
emails that the decision was based on code that, _although not perfect on
submission_ could most rapidly be made to work. You have just twisted what
I've said here to contradict that. Please read ALL of my emails, instead of
selectively attacking only what you disagree with.
( I also don't appreciate being copied back onto LKML, after a long email
diatribe (which you selectively did not copy). It's just bad netiquette. )
> > Who cares? You can't say either Linus or Ingo are any worse in this
> > regard, so it's irrelevant when discussing why SD wasn't chosen. This is
> > just as political as anything negative that Linus said.
>
> I imagine if it was your pet project, and you were trampled on in this
> manner, you'd care. And I don't like seeing people abused like this.
I certainly wouldn't expect my code to be taken. If somebody else's was taken,
I would accept that I was powerless to make them do otherwise. That's what
benevolent dictatorships are all about and what somebody familiar with Linux
development should expect.
The best way to deal with "injustices" is to constructively move past them.
Con decided to leave the community, and that's another option. I just think
everybody's lost out, himself included.
> I also don't care to see a project I care about weakened due to petty
> drama and politics. I had hoped the Linux community was above this.
> Your lack of compassion in the matter however is duly noted. We have
> polar views and aren't going to agree.
LKML isn't _normally_ a place for compassion, but for code, and I'm pretty
sure that if there was less compassion we'd have fewer flamewars and less of
the petty politics that you are complaining so loudly about.
Either you can convince Linus to change his mind, or you can't. Complaining
about it will achieve nothing other than to increase the noise to signal on
LKML.
--
Cheers,
Alistair.
137/1 Warrender Park Road, Edinburgh, UK.