Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759144Ab3GSLKa (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Jul 2013 07:10:30 -0400 Received: from mail-ea0-f175.google.com ([209.85.215.175]:57601 "EHLO mail-ea0-f175.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751114Ab3GSLK2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Jul 2013 07:10:28 -0400 Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 13:10:21 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Sarah Sharp Cc: Linus Torvalds , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Rusty Russell , Willy Tarreau , Guenter Roeck , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Steven Rostedt , Dave Jones , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Andrew Morton , stable , Darren Hart , Mauro Carvalho Chehab Subject: Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review Message-ID: <20130719111021.GD26716@gmail.com> References: <20130715155202.GC29526@xanatos> <20130716210856.GF4994@xanatos> <4384290.4rZz7uttsZ@vostro.rjw.lan> <20130717052250.GB14392@xanatos> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130717052250.GB14392@xanatos> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3658 Lines: 76 * Sarah Sharp wrote: > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 03:12:45PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > I react very strongly when somebody argues against fixing regressions. > > Let's just say that there's too many years of baggage that I carry > > around on that issue.. > > > > So that is definitely one of the things that make me go ballistic. > > Buggy code isn't actually one of them. Bugs happen. Even really stupid > > bugs happen, and happen to good people. They had a bad day, or it was > > just a brainfart. Not that I will be _polite_ about bad code, mind > > you, and there might be some bad words in there, but it doesn't make > > me blow up. > > > > Being cavalier about known regressions is definitely the primary > > trigger. I suspect there are others, but I can't seem to recall any > > other particular hot-button issues right now. Maybe Sarah can post a > > few more pointers.. > > Hmm... The only thing I can think of off the top of my head is that you > tend to hate it when someone puts the needs of their particular > architecture or distro at a higher priority than the needs of the kernel > community. If they start to push crap code late in the merge window to > further their personal goals, you tend to blow up at them. See the > 'deep throat' comment on the PE binary signing thread, for instance. > > The timing of when incidents happen also seems to effect whether you get > triggered. I suspect most of the incidents of you "blowing up" at > people happen during the merge window. Of course timing matters: - there are times when a bad pull request can have worse effects, such as shortly before -rc1 or shortly before -final - when many people will be exposed to a new kernel for the first time. - timing can also sometimes show a certain level of dishonesty on the developer's side: trying to slip in a bad tree near the end of the merge window, before people can complain it ... - there are times when Linus naturally more vulnerable to not having enough time to think things through: such as when he is pulling a dozen trees per day, during the merge window. Dishonesty, bad timing, running a bad Git flow and making irreversible ABI mistakes [of which refusing to fix app regressions is one sort] are all hot button issues for Linus, and it's a pretty natural list I think: because they are the least actionable, most persistent and thus riskiest "meta" problems possible in a kernel project. Some of Linus's "worst" flames had two or more of these hot button issues mixed together. Sometimes a maintainer can get away with a mistake (most likely Linus does not notice the mistake) but in general it's all pretty consistent. All in one, with all due respect, I don't think your complaints voiced so far against Linus have much merit :-/ I think you'll experience it first hand once you become a top level maintainer. Having said that, I do share your concern that women are more offput by the widespread 'manly' talk on lkml: LKML is filled with testosterone. I think your solution to create a separate culture is a good one - and eventually the two cultures will counter-balance each other in a good way and will maybe merge. I cannot think of a better solution either, and I fully support your efforts: it's one of the big unsolved problems of Linux kernel development. Thanks, Ingo -- 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/