Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Sat, 8 Jul 2023 11:02:49 -0400
From:   "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
To:     Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@linux.dev>
Cc:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>,
        Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
        "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>,
        Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>,
        torvalds@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-bcachefs@vger.kernel.org,
        dchinner@redhat.com, sandeen@redhat.com, bfoster@redhat.com,
        jack@suse.cz, andreas.gruenbacher@gmail.com, peterz@infradead.org,
        akpm@linux-foundation.org, dhowells@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] bcachefs
Message-ID: <20230708150249.GO1178919@mit.edu>
References: <20230626214656.hcp4puionmtoloat@moria.home.lan>
 <20230706155602.mnhsylo3pnief2of@moria.home.lan>
 <20230706164055.GA2306489@perftesting>
 <20230706173819.36c67pf42ba4gmv4@moria.home.lan>
 <20230706211914.GB11476@frogsfrogsfrogs>
 <20230707-badeverbot-gekettet-19ce3c238dac@brauner>
 <20230707091810.bamrvzcif7ncng46@moria.home.lan>
 <30661670c55601ff475f2f0698c2be2958e45c38.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
 <ZKjd7nQxvzRDA2tK@casper.infradead.org>
 <20230708043136.xj4u7mhklpblomqd@moria.home.lan>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230708043136.xj4u7mhklpblomqd@moria.home.lan>
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, Jul 08, 2023 at 12:31:36AM -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> 
> I've long thought a more useful CoC would start with "always try to
> continue the technical conversation in good faith, always try to build
> off of what other people are saying; don't shut people down".

Kent, with all due respect, do you not always follow your suggested
formulation that you've stated above.  That is to say, you do not
always assume that your conversational partner is trying to raise
objections in good faith.  You also want to assume that you are the
smartest person in the room, and if they object, they are Obviously
Wrong.

As a result, it's not pleasant to have a technical conversation with
you, and as others have said, when someone like Christian Brauner has
decided that it's too frustating to continue with the thread, given my
observations of his past interaction with a wide variety of people,
including some folks who have been traditionally regarded as
"difficult to work with", it's a real red flag.

Regards,

					- Ted