Slashdot Mirror
Matthew Garrett Forks the Linux Kernel
jones_supa writes: Just like Sarah Sharp, Linux developer Matthew Garrett has gotten fed up with the unprofessional development culture surrounding the kernel. "I remember having to deal with interminable arguments over the naming of an interface because Linus has an undying hatred of BSD securelevel, or having my name forever associated with the deepthroating of Microsoft because Linus couldn't be bothered asking questions about the reasoning behind a design before trashing it," Garrett writes. He has chosen to go his own way, and has forked the Linux kernel and added patches that implement a BSD-style securelevel interface. Over time it is expected to pick up some of the power management code that Garrett is working on, and we shall see where it goes from there.
My code didn't meet the project leaders quality requirements, I'm leaving.
Waaaahhhh!.
Another guy whose wasting his efforts on a project that will never be picked up by a mainstream distro and thus will die a slow, quiet death.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
I don't actually mean to sound snide but can someone explain to me why I should care about this as an end user? TFS reads like someone got their panties in a bunch over some arcane detail and couldn't bear to not get his way. Is there some amazing benefit to users in this or is this just some developer having a snit because Linus disagreed with his preferences?
Hopefully he will keep his branch in sync and offer back his contributions like other developers who have done the same thing.
Many developers felt that working on the main Linux kernel tree involved too much politics and in-fighting and chose to maintain their own dev branches for their patches. Any that keep their trees in sync have successfully continued to contribute, and left the politics for when their projects were ready for merging. Any that didn't keep in sync, well . . . at least we don't worry about those projects anymore.
This is how it's supposed to work. Whether he can make a functioning team or not is an open question, but at least he can see if a more polite environment gets better results.
Furthermore, should something like this be omitted simply because Linus doesn't like it? Is his opinion the only one that counts?
Since he is the repo owner, yes, his opinion is the only one that counts in the end.
Although this project will probably never end up being used in any wide way, shouldn't the Linux community be concerned that it's running talent away with a poor culture?
If this were happening at our office, we'd all be concerned about brain drain.
Why should a person face a gauntlet of incivility and vitriol, one that you liken to a frying pan, to contribute to an open source project?
Code reviews, design reviews, that makes sense. Being referred to someone at a lower paygrade rather than the top tier of kernel devs, sure. These things are stressful but essential. I'd stand to lose considerable self-esteem from them, but there's nothing I can do about that but get better.
But if I went into a code or design review at work and got a Torvalds-style response, I'd be reporting the person to HR and finding a more civil person to work with. If I couldn't work around them and nobody was making them change, I'd find another job. I could try to modify the problematic person's behavior, but that would be stressful and unlikely to work, and I shouldn't have to act as my coworkers' parent.
Garrett found that there was no HR to appeal to, no way to work around Torvalds, and no way to change him. So he did in fact get out of the frying pan. He doesn't deserve to be seared whenever he gets anything done, so he's not tolerating it. Now he's getting the same things done in a way that normal people will be happier with.
This isn't a deficiency on his part. He merely doesn't want to deal with something that normal people shouldn't have to deal with.
I didn't agree with the views he had, but he never attacked any of the people that worked for him over their sexual preference. He made a contribution to something he PERSONALLY felt was correct and was demonized for it years later by people too quick to pick up the pitch forks. Just like Tim Hunt, Matt Taylor and Brad Wardell.
I want you to seriously think about how easy it's going to be to remove someone from any community that's preventing the shit that ended up on firefox.
Corporation and/or Government: "We want mandatory tracking in XXX"
XXX project lead: "No way, not going to happen"
Rando on Twitter: "XXX project lead is a bigot"
< Ensuing twitter storm and articles about XXX project lead >
XXX project lead: "People are sending me things in the mail and threatening my family, I have to step down"
Corporation and/or Government: "We want mandatory tracking in XXX"
New XXX project lead: "Sure thing boss."
I see a lot of parallels with other things I've seen going on over the last year. Like this for example
https://www.reddit.com/r/progr...
Labeling someone as a "bigot" is just a convenient way to get people to attack them or feel better about attacking them, allegations true or not.
Although this project will probably never end up being used in any wide way, shouldn't the Linux community be concerned that it's running talent away with a poor culture?
No.
Anyone with any real experience in hacking the Linux kernel already knows what they're getting into. It is also very widely known that Linus is incredibly fair in his assessments. If you provide useful contributions, no worries. If your commit is a total brainfart, you'll get a rejection, but the abuse won't come unless you decide to be a dumbass or get all arrogant about it.
It's about as fair as it gets.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Believe me, I can't stand SJWs, but there comes a point when the whole community just has an asshole elitist behavior, when they aren't elite at anything other than being nominees for biggest douche in the universe award.
Just another attention-whoring SJW.
Who got their panties in a bunch because WAAAAAHHHH LINUS SAID MEAN THINGS TO ME ON A MAILING LIST
Yes, Linus Torvalds is a gigantic, flaming dickwad. So what.
He's not your employer. You don't depend on him for your paycheck. And he isn't coming into your home or office and berating you in person. If you're that upset about something that someone wrote on a mailing list, and you have a problem with the basic concept that this is the guy who created Linux and this is how he wants things to work, then you need to GTFO.
And he isn't coming into your home or office and berating you in person.
And that makes a difference... how, exactly?
Athiesm Plus
I remember that clusterfuck well...it was a total crapload of pure stupid, with dickheads like PZ Meyers jumping on the bandwagon.
Garrett is the idiot who, while working for Red Hat, screeched that a kernel developer Ted Tso was a 'rape apologist' on a mailing list - completely untrue and a disgusting lie.
Ahh yes, "rape apologist", the specious accusation that keeps on giving. Needs no basis in fact or reality to be used, smears the target nicely, and makes the accuser feel like he/she is "helping the world".
The people that use this term to accuse others of some supposed behavior can't even agree on what it means, and by some definitions if you've ever looked at a woman on the street and thought she was attractive, you're a "rape apologist". If you've ever looked at nude images of women on the internet, you're a "rape apologist". The list goes on and on and most of it is genuinely insane.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
What talent? The SJWs are all pretty talented at being hypocritical and shedding crocodile tears at the UN, but they don't seem to be any good at actually writing code.
If they were then Zoe Quinn's "game" would have been more than reams of self-pitying text and some multiple-choice. A teenage script kiddie could do better.
Sarkeesian would have several AAA titles under her belt instead of just talking about how everyone else should make games to suit her.
That female kernel dev from yesterday would have forked the kernel herself or done something really impressive if she had the chops-- instead she apparently couldn't hang with the real bad asses and tried to make it sound like it was everyone being mean to poor little her. But as far as I can tell she butted into some good-natured ribbing between friends on the mailing list and got all offended at remarks that had absolutely nothing to do with her.
Ellen Pao is precisely the same way: lots of talk and being offended but has never actually accomplished anything aside from ruining Reddit (love it or hate it).
Poetering is the only programmer target of persecution I've ever heard of that actually doesn't deserve the hatred and who has actually accomplished something. But, oh, look: he's not a SJW and he doesn't make a living from being permanently offended; he makes a living writing code and gettin' stuff done (regardless of whether you hate systemd).
The FOSS community will be much better off without the SJW "contributions". Kernel development should be done by programmers not by self-righteous whiners who complain on twitter about how offended they always feel instead of fixing bugs. We'll never hear of this fork of the kernel ever again because the people behind it are not trying to make good software. I'm not saying that Linus' methods are efficient or effective, just that the goals are different.
Damn, if I had mod points, they'd be yours. Mod parent UP.
Yes, people like Zoe "5 Guys" Quinn and Anita "The Liar" Sarkeesian are useless leeches who make a living by being professional victims.
They lie, they steal, they cheat, they game the system, and they still manage to hold on to their "I'm a Victim!" flag. It's unbelievable.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Indeed, people should just take vicious verbal abuse.
Which is nonsense, and completely non-arrogant, technical arguments have been met with vicious personal attacks and verbal abuse. There's a shockingly large number of emotionally immature and insecure people in the Kernel community, and a great many people meet the wrath of those people for no good reason.
And they abuse because they know they can get away with it and others like you will apologize and defend it.
> Why should a person face a gauntlet of incivility and vitriol, one that you liken to a frying pan, to contribute to an open source project?
They shouldn't, but you're assuming this is actually the case. Everyone is civil until people start getting arrogant, then the gloves come off. So if you don't want abuse, don't act like a dick and expect others not to say anything.
> But if I went into a code or design review at work and got a Torvalds-style response, I'd be reporting the person to HR and finding a more civil person to work with.
You wouldn't get that kind of review unless you were an asshole to the reviewer first. And this is an open community, nobody is forcing anyone to do anything. You don't have the right to decide that other people should be forced to like you or that they cannot call you out for being a jerk when you act like one. And if you don't like it, you don't ever have to talk to them.
> Garrett found that there was no HR to appeal to, no way to work around Torvalds, and no way to change him.
It's a free country. If there was such an HR, he could be sent there too. But we don't have social police to crack down on anyone who makes you feel bad and that's a good thing. What he does have is the option he used: the option to walk.
And guess what? If he's a dick to contributors, there still won't be any "HR" for anyone to talk to. That's how it works. It's open and free and... apparently some people hate that.
Because you can always press delete, close the window, and walk away. Preferrably without posting a big rant complaining about why you’re ragequitting first, but whatev’s
You're not wrong Walter. You're just an asshole.
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
I almost can't wait for 5-10 years down the road when she's completely irrelevant and everyone's making fun of her like they do to Jack Thompson now for having the exact same argument he had.
I'm hoping that it won't take nearly that long...but it probably will.
It'll be interesting to see just how long she can make a living at playing the victim card. To see her at the UN underscores just how ridiculous and irrelevant the UN has become. She and Zoe Quinn should never have been given an audience there. It's shameful and embarrassing.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
This actually matches what I have seen. I think this whole thing is about people with entitlement issues that think whatever great thing they do deserves unconditional respect and admiration. And when it then turns out their idea was not so smart and Linus is telling them in language that cannot be misunderstood, they look for fault with him instead of themselves. The language argument is completely bogus. In fact, when Linus rants at somebody, he is not disrespecting them, as he always gives rational reasons. Disrespecting them would be to add them silently to an ignore-list.
My take is that the SJWs and the self-proclaimed geniuses just cannot deal with running into people smarter and more experienced than them. The Linux core-team is admittedly one of the most high-powered engineering teams on the planet. And yes, there quite a few decisions they made that I do not like, but these are details in comparison to the overall achievement.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
I've seen references to "don't get your panties in a bunch", Mr Garrett called "girly" in a negative tone, and a "pussy", in a negative tone. And people wonder why some form the opinion of developers as sexist?
And we all talk about OpenSource as choice, yet when someone chooses to leave a project because of non-technical issues such as language choice from managers, we deride them. So, choice is good, as long as you choose to follow what I tell you...
anyways, carry on.
While I think it's unfortunate that some innocents get caught in the crossfire, the toxicity of SJW culture is simply so damaging that I think the approach of not giving an inch is the only tenable one. Once you start coddling specific individuals by sanctions against other individuals you immediately start up the competition of the most offended, the community fractures into group politics and productivity rapidly dissipates.
There's no utility in being deliberatly uncivil unless it's necessary to get a point across, but as soon as someone starts requiring special snowflake status and demonstrates a sense of entitlement to special care for theirs or others feelings then they should get that discussion shut down asap. Allowing the SJW mindset to start festering will do much more damage than the cost of losing a few good developers.
(And it's hardly the first time Matthew Garrett has figured in an SJW context...)
Indeed!
Not literally of course, but still. Linus has been and still is in charge, and has managed OK.
But has also kicked out quite a number of good professionals, for no other reason than his narcissism, ego and at times completely dysfunctional communication.
Is it ok if RMS eats his own toenails? It's ok, because he's really smart any any GNU hackers know to what they're getting into and should be able to tolerate such behavior and learn to grow a thicker stomach.
But that's bullshit. Normal people would say "dude, that's just gross, stop it". So normal people on the kernel would either say "dude, lighten up" or else leave the project. When they don't things become dysfunctional, witness any corporation with an asshole CEO and the pandering followers who defend his actions.
So is Linus the genius who never does wrong and is never unfair in his constructive criticisms, or is he human and sometimes makes mistakes and chews people out when he hasn't taken the time to understand what he's ranting about? Cultist vs realist.