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.

Comments

Benefit to end users?

[sjbe]

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?

Re:Benefit to end users?

[serviscope_minor]

I don't actually mean to sound snide

Yeah you do, otherwise you wouldn't have said this:

TFS reads like someone got their panties in a bunch over some arcane detail and couldn't bear to not get his way

Guy gets finally fed up with dealing with insane LKML politics and decides to have his own tree with his own patches. Guy isn't some rando, guy is a long term contributor to the mailing list.

TFA also makes note of another long term technically respected contributor leaving the kernel because of insane LKML politics.

You should probably care because the politics driving away good people means that inevitably the quality will go down when those good people find more enjoyable places to work. And good people always have options.

The thing is many people confuse beinf honest and technically sound with being a raging douchebag. They're not actually the same and you can in fact give honest, harsh technical feedback without being a dick about it. The LKML seems to actualely valye the "being a dick" part over even the technical parts of arguments.

Anyway you shoudl care because the kernel maintainers are overworked and some are leaving because the remaining ones like being dicks.

Re:Benefit to end users?

[serviscope_minor]

Your work is all i care about. Its a meritocracy.

Except it isn't because two long term, well respected contributors have left not because of code, quality or merit but because of the toxic mailing list.

Hopefully he will maintain it in sync

[Ruedii]

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.

How it should be

[mveloso]

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.

Re:Can't take the heat?

[dhasenan]

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.

Re:Who?

[Penguinisto]

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.

Re: Waaaahhhhh!!

[amicusNYCL]

You don't blame Linus? When people are talking about signing and parsing PE binaries, and whether that belongs in the kernel or in userland, you think that it's perfectly acceptable to talk about sucking dicks? That's effective management to you?

I mean, why can't Linus just make his point without multiple references to sucking dicks? Why is that not an option?

That's the point he's making. He's not talking about whether or not Linus is correct, he's talking about the way in which Linus chooses to communicate.