Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934116Ab3GQR4c (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jul 2013 13:56:32 -0400 Received: from smtp.citrix.com ([66.165.176.89]:7491 "EHLO SMTP.CITRIX.COM" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933916Ab3GQR43 (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jul 2013 13:56:29 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.89,686,1367971200"; d="scan'208";a="37596538" Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 18:56:16 +0100 From: Stefano Stabellini X-X-Sender: sstabellini@kaball.uk.xensource.com To: Felipe Contreras CC: Stefano Stabellini , Steven Rostedt , Sarah Sharp , CAI Qian , David Lang , , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Darren Hart , Olivier Galibert , stable , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Willy Tarreau , Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20130715204135.GH15531@xanatos> <20130716211235.GG4994@xanatos> <20130716212704.GB9371@thunk.org> <20130716224357.GK4994@xanatos> <1374015299.6458.76.camel@gandalf.local.home> <20130716231217.GL4994@xanatos> <51E5D7C8.5000306@gmail.com> <1374018809.2249.29.camel@leira.trondhjem.org> <1000066089.1803398.1374046596236.JavaMail.root@redhat.com> <20130717144849.GB16513@xanatos> <1374073771.6458.143.camel@gandalf.local.home> User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1672 Lines: 46 On Wed, 17 Jul 2013, Felipe Contreras wrote: > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 12:00 PM, Stefano Stabellini > wrote: > > On Wed, 17 Jul 2013, Steven Rostedt wrote: > >> The last thing I want to do is to lower the quality of the kernel just > >> to get a wider range of developers. > > > > Can we stop bringing the quality of the code into the discussion? > > Can you please stop calling open communication abuse? Open communication is one thing, abuse is another, so I agree with you there. > First you have > to explain *why* it was improper in order to call it abuse, and in the > few examples that have been shown, it has been explained that the > behavior was justified (breaking the #1 rule by a lieutenant who > should know better). Abuse is never justified, I hope that's clear for everybody. Two wrongs don't make a right. So we are down to the definition of verbal abuse. The Oxford dictionary gives me: "speak to (someone) in an insulting and offensive way" For example I think that calling somebody a moron qualifies. > > I think it's pretty clear that one doesn't need to be verbally abusive > > in order to stop bad code from getting into the kernel. > > You can think whatever you want, others have already shown that > changing the tone of the message in the examples would have changed > the desired effect. I disagree and it is certainly not the case in my experience. -- 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/