Slashdot Mirror
The 2.5 Kernel Tree And Alan Cox
Motor writes "It seems that (as everyone suspected), the 2.5 Linux kernel tree is close to opening. However, contrary to expectations, 2.4 will not be maintained by Alan Cox, but will instead be handled by Marcelo Tosatti. Thanks to Alan for all his hard work on 2.0 and 2.2."
Go read the linux-kernel mailing list archives; at least once every couple of months, someone tries to give Linus a 300K patch, and he rejects it. Linus wants *small* patches, which do specific things, or implement one new feature.
Essentially, the only reason NON-platform-specific stuff gets through faster is because it all goes to Alan Cox, who then stuffs them into his own tree (the -ac* patches). When he decides they're stable enough to pass on, he breaks them up into bite-sized pieces for Linus.
I welcome 2.5! I wish it would come sooner!
This whole VM and severe -ac branching which has occurred truly frightened me. If it persisted, it certainly would have resulted in a fork of sorts.
It seems that Alan has a good understanding of what a release kernel should have, and the types of changes that should occur in such a kernel. Introducing a new VM, as stated before on slushdot, in the middle/end of a stable kernel series, is plain silly.
Come to think of it, I kind of like the idea that Alan is NOT maintaing the stable kernel, for 2 reasons:
1. His talent would be best served on new development of the 2.5 kernel (hey, who doesn't like working on the cool new stuff).
2. In light of his anti-DMCA actions, it would seem that he has no issue with putting Linux up on the firing line to support his politically motivated beliefs. It doesn't matter if you agree with Alan on the DMCA or not, not posting changelog notes like he did was childish and counterproductive to the goal of Linux: world domination through collaboration.
Your argument is not relevant. Religion or gun laws have very little direct impact upon kernel development (for the most part - we can all make up spurious arguments to try and show otherwise). Copyright law has a direct impact not just on the programmers in the country passing the law but also, in the case of the DMCA, on hackers in other countries.
Whether one agrees or disagees with Cox and his tactics, the poloitics involved are affecting the development of Linux (the OS and the kernel) and other Free Software.
- Derwen
http://fsfeurope.org/
By saying you are "against the DCMA" you are by nature making a *political* statement. I say this because DCMA is a law and once you start to argure about laws being wrong your are in the domain of politics. Hell, just look at headlines recently on slashdot there's a nice big chunk that have to do with politics.
As, for the artical the author looks like he is fumming because as a US citizen he is being kept in the dark about "secret" kernel changes. The author then goes on to say "with his typical English resentment of the former colonies who have long since outstripped England in world influence". What has this got to do it anyway? Has ANYONE ever heard of Alan acting in this way? I doubt it, infact if Alan was german I can just imagine some Nazi comment in its place. I just stopped reading the article there since this guy is obviously out to slure Alan because he is being inconvienced by a *law* that is active in *his* country. I mean, remember all the non-US servers when we had crypto laws??
Always has. Always will (I hope).
:). He also is a practical man in terms of software use. I.e. He still disputes Linus' edict that binary only kernel modules are alowed but at the same time he didn't force Telsa to switch to Linux right away. (She uses it now).
Most people don't know this but in the weekly kernel traphic he is usualy listed #1 in volume of messages. He also subscibes to and discuses important isues in many other places from slashdot.org to the kde-licensing mailing list.
BTW: Read his diary. That's how I found out that he is a GNU fundamentalist
Speaking of Telsa. Her site "The more accurate diary. Really." should be requird reading for anyone dateing a Linux geek with serius intentions towards that geek.
--= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
Fah, Kernel developers should do whatever the heck they want, and we should all be grateful. When you start paying Mr. Cox for his work then perhaps you might be able to gain some leverage over how he expresses his opinions. In the meantime, why should anyone listen to you?
Here's an idea. Why don't you code up something half as nifty as whatever Alan will code up over breakfast tomorrow, release it as Free Software for the world to see, and put in your Changelog that Alan is a wanker. Perhaps the people that use your software will care what you have to say.
As far as I am concerned Free Software is a perfectly good medium for espousing your political views. Especially since if you don't like Alan's views you can still use his excellent software without being subject to them.
The DMCA has nothing to do with this btw - and I think given 6 months the US courts will have given the congress the required slap around the head with a wet herring. Until then it pays to be careful
All uncensored change logs are on
http://www.thefreeworld.net for non US citizens. US citizens take their own chances
... how about if kernel maintainers started putting in comments about their pro-life stance, their pro-Christian religious views, or their pro-gun views ...
In my opinion, his comments were directly applicable to kernel development. Gun control, abortion, and Christian views on the otherhand, seem inapplicable to kernel development.
According to the DMCA, it is illegal to post information about such vulnerabilities, and he took steps necessary to protect himself from prosection under United States federal law should he ever set foot in that country.
My car gets 40 rods to the hogshead, and that's the way I likes it!
Yeah, why is a "to-kill" abortion doctors list different? Because in contrast to such a list, the DMCA *will be* affecting his right to publish open source code (besides, there's an obvious difference in scope).
You assume that he is just having political issues with the DMCA and as a UK citizen, he won't be affected anyway. However, he has strong ties to the US (remember, Red Hat's US-based, and he does work for them) and the Skylarov episode shows that it actually _is_ a possible reason for indictment if you write code that defies some arbitrary rules. This is what the DMCA has been used for.
This is why Alan Cox has all the right in the world, as a kernel maintainer in the global Free Software/Open Source community, to do everything he can to allow him to continue writing code. Fighting the DMCA is not a politically correct thing, it's a necessity for him to keep on working. If it's _also_ what he - coincidentally - believes in, it doesn't change its validity.
Yours Arondylos #8-)
Anyone who's followed Alan Cox for a while would laugh at the notion that Alan could be a Red Hat puppet. The day he has a falling out with Red Hat, he'll instantly get a substantial amount of money from some other company. If anything, Alan's involvement in a company that has to support users makes him a better judge of many things than someone in Linus's more isolated position.
If Red Hat is pushing a particular technical direction for Linux, it's quite likely that the reason for the push is because of the expert opinions of the many kernel hackers that work for them as to which code is mature enough to support.
Who would file a complaint to prosecute Mr. Cox under the DMCA? No one. Therefore, Mr. Cox's actions can only be viewed as themselves a troll, an unjustified insult.
Whether or not anyone would file a complaint to prosecute him, he would still be breaking the law, according to the advice he was given. I find it hard to criticise him for not breaking it, and even harder to justify the argument that he should have broken the law to avoid being insulting.
If you don't like the consequences of your laws, then pressure your elected representatives to change them.
why would someone want to maintain an old kernel?
It sounds boring to me... Adding new features should be more engaging then fixing bugs and pleasing users.
Ah, but you are forgetting that more people actually use the stable 2.4 kernel as part of many many distributions. Having the responsibility of maintaining this very important (and mission critical in many cases) kernel is right on par with making the next version. It's just a different kind of responsibility.
----- rL