Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751848Ab3GQD2V (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Jul 2013 23:28:21 -0400 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:44830 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751443Ab3GQD2T (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Jul 2013 23:28:19 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.89,682,1367996400"; d="scan'208";a="371434161" Message-ID: <1374031686.12825.143.camel@envy.home> Subject: Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review From: Darren Hart To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Rusty Russell , Sarah Sharp , Willy Tarreau , Ingo Molnar , Guenter Roeck , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Steven Rostedt , Dave Jones , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Andrew Morton , stable , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , "Rafael J. Wysocki" Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2013 20:28:06 -0700 In-Reply-To: References: <20130715155202.GC29526@xanatos> <20130715174659.GC15531@xanatos> <20130715180403.GD15531@xanatos> <20130715184642.GE15531@xanatos> <20130715191727.GC10157@1wt.eu> <8738rf14zl.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <20130716210856.GF4994@xanatos> <878v16yp57.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> Organization: Intel Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.8.3 (3.8.3-2.fc19) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2630 Lines: 59 On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 18:37 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 6:02 PM, Rusty Russell wrote: > >> > >> "Mauro, SHUT THE FUCK UP!" > > > > This one crosses the line. There's no non-offensive way to tell a geek > > "you are wrong", but this isn't even trying. Bad Linus! > > You know what? Not my proudest moment. I was really upset. This goes a long way to resolving the stated issues in my opinion. Of the three issues raised, Linus has either adequately justified himself or conceded. This wasn't meant to be Linus on trial was it? :-) I'm sure we could dig up a thousand more references of "bad" behavior from others on LKML. Before we do let's first make sure the recipient is not being "resistant to education" (a phrase I've picked up from Thomas Gleixner and like very much) or has somehow provoked things. Ted Ts'o will recall fondly all the pigs in guinea *smirk*. I enjoy a good rant as much as anyone, but I recognize personal attacks can be very harmful to the individual and possibly (difficult to prove) the quality of the project. This is especially true when coming from someone that is held in very high regard, such as Linus and the other maintainers. I think the one tangible TODO that has come out of this is to DOCUMENT expectations. Paul Gortmaker has already submitted a netdev FAQ which I have reviewed and David Miller approved of. I have committed to review stable_kernel_rules. It appears there is also call to have Linus' expectations of the maintainers documented. This would also be good for everyone to read to better understand the responses they receive from maintainers and why things are the way they are. With that done, I think some tolerance in both directions would improve things here. And as a last resort, we speak up when someone is under attack. "Whoa Nelly, calm down, don't forget your meds. Seriously though, that (is not acceptable code|violates a core policy), see the following documentation." This adds some burden on the broader audience to point people at the docs, because even RTFM has to get annoying to repeat too often. And with that, I'll sign out of this thread unless anyone wants to discuss documentation - but those should probably happen on LKML (or maybe KS as some have suggested). -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center Yocto Project - Linux Kernel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/