Slashdot Mirror
Linux Community To Adopt New Code of Conduct (kernel.org)
Following Linus Torvalds' public apology for his behavior over the years, the Linux Community said it will be adopting a new "Code of Conduct", which pledges to make "participation in our project and our community a harassment-free experience for everyone, regardless of age, body size, disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, level of experience, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, religion, or sexual identity and orientation."
No clue. But they could have cut out complete swaths of text just by stating "We don't care what you are, what you do, or what your opinions are. Just show us the code. If it's good, we'll take it. If it's not, we'll see what we can salvage". All this fluffy bullshit is just that. Fluffy bullshit.
I really, really, really wish these had been handled non-concurrently. It's virtually impossible not to analyze or comment on the two events together, which leads to some unsettling connotations for some.
While I think Linus taking a breather to maybe not be as much of a dick while still demanding high quality code is an admirable moment of self-reflection, the roots of this Code of Conduct are quite unsettling.
One really can't discuss the wording of the CoC without discussing the Contributor Covenant and the larger philosophical goals of the Post-Meritocracy manifesto.
From the CC:
From the PMM:
These are explicitly political documents... and they should be addressed as such. I don't think anyone has a problem with "don't be a jerk, and don't make it personal" in an open source project. Arguably, Linus has stepped over the line on occasion. The adoption of this document goes far beyond rectifying a mere lack of teeth in telling people to "Be excellent to each other"
Hire a Linux system administrator, systems engineer,
This Code of Conduct applies both within project spaces and in public spaces when an individual is representing the project or its community. Examples of representing a project or community include using an official project e-mail address, posting via an official social media account, or acting as an appointed representative at an online or offline event.
Looks good. So if you are not acting on behalf of the project, use official project email for communication, or were officially appointed representative, then your conduct has no relationship with this. Extreme example - Nazi would still be able to contribute as long as Nazi-related speech is kept out of commits, discussions, mailing list, and group events.
Representation of a project may be further defined and clarified by project maintainers.
Ugh, what? Why bother defining the above applicability rules and then inserting this gigantic "scope is what project maintainers decide the scope is"? This seems like a huge flaw that has to be fixed.
This is the end of Linux as we know it. The "Code of Conduct" is teeming with words and phrases that indicate the project is now going to be policed by Social Justice Warriors who will micro-manage everything. It means that the Linux kernel is no longer a meritocracy.
The only "code of conduct" ought to be: "my code doesn't care about your feelings". You can't develop good code in a Safe Space.
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
Except Wheaton is one of the biggest violators of that.
Or, grow a skin and fix your damn code.
Meanwhile, what was removed:
-The Linux kernel development effort is a very personal process compared
-to "traditional" ways of developing software. Your code and ideas
-behind it will be carefully reviewed, often resulting in critique and
-criticism. The review will almost always require improvements to the
-code before it can be included in the kernel. Know that this happens
-because everyone involved wants to see the best possible solution for
-the overall success of Linux. This development process has been proven
-to create the most robust operating system kernel ever, and we do not
-want to do anything to cause the quality of submission and eventual
-result to ever decrease.
-
-If however, anyone feels personally abused, threatened, or otherwise
-uncomfortable due to this process, that is not acceptable. If so,
-please contact the Linux Foundation's Technical Advisory Board at
-, or the individual members, and they
-will work to resolve the issue to the best of their ability.
So, the language that states "best possible solution" has been replaced language related to the "good of the community." Personally, I don't interact with Linux as a community (if my name isn't enough of a tip-off). I consume it as a product, and I want the best product I can get in order to go do something else, because work. If they think they can still get the best product while airing all this drama in public and trying to build sticks to hit each other with, whatever. Good on them. What I fear will happen is more "my ignorance is just as valid as your expertise, and if you don't think so i'm going to beat you with the CoC until you stop hurting my feelings." That's not going to result in a better product.
But, not my community, not my responsibility. But now that most of the world runs on this stack, I just want to see a consistently high level of quality. Lack of quality makes it my problem, regardless of whether or not it is my responsibility.
Yeah, but he's right.
Or, more contributors will stick around because now they don't have to deal with abusive dicks like you
Someone thinks because they wear a man bun , a fedora, and attended a couple month how to code camp they are actually skilled and knowledgeable.
I am sure the project is going to love having more people working on it
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Hopefully Linus is taking a break to hone his language skills so he can better destroy truly annoying people that have no business being near the kernel.
This is going to be what is used most of the time:
What that actually means in practice is that you cannot safely go through someone's code review and leave honest comments that demonstrate that the product is fundamentally bad. Welcoming and inclusive refer to a specific emotion which is to make things as warm and bubbly and positive as you can. Well, a lot of the time you can't do that.
What they want is to create for FOSS the same space they have in corporate America where HR, not line management, deals with things like personality conflicts that blow up. It's not going to make people polite, it's going to make people afraid to just be blunt with active, thin-skinned people who cannot stand to hear that their contribution is not good enough.
I don't see why somebody's gender or sexual preferences even need to come up in the first place on a mailing list discussing technical issues about the code.
Ever deal with a retard that thinks himself a genius? Sometimes being offensive is the only way to blow past the idiocy efficiently.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Well how many? And how many bullshit ideas were accepted because criticizing == triggering or worse denying "lived-in experience"?
US-UK-Israel: The real Axis of Evil
The kernel is an engineering project. As such, meritocracy is the only sane way to run it - just like building bridges or ships - if your code is good then it's in, no matter who you are or what you or anyone else identifies you as. There's simply no reason to accept someone or their work if it's sub-standard no matter how hard their lives have been (or are perceived to have been).
The issue of diversity is a social issue and has to be/needs to be solved elsewhere.
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
Your argument fails in the fact perhaps that guy with the man bun or a fedora and attended those code camps are actually a brilliant person who can really contribute.
LOL
Or you do want Linux coded by all guys with a short hair cut, suites, and has PHDs.
Have. But you can haz cheezberger
Coding is 25% intelligence and 75% effort.
For bad programmers.
What's really amazing is that you were too stupid to understand what the Fred Brooks software engineering links meant but you just tried to lecture someone who has been at it, longer than you have been alive.
Yeah I see Linux doing real well now / sarcasm
This, this right the fuck here.
I've seen more than my share of soi-disant developer gods (who, well, weren't), and sometimes the only way to shut them the hell up and make them listen is to nuke their ego from orbit and use a few harsh words to drive the point home while you do it.
This method works perfectly in the Military (has for literal centuries), and adapts nicely to the dev world.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
And this is why he's right:
"So somebody isn't telling the truth here. Somebody is pushing complete garbage for unclear reasons. Sorry for having to point that out."
He never trashes the human being, only the stupid thing they did, and people do stupid things and need feedback and correction. But the SJW culture has people focusing on their feelings and their fragile egos instead of what is being built.
If he is too afraid to speak he can not be brilliant -- he hasn't had a chance to achieve brilliance without engaging with others and correcting, or standing his ground, based on their feedback.
Actually, this is generally what happens to a project. It adopts a CoC or enough anonymous/SJW complaints are created, big contributors leave or are forced out, the project dies or slows because it is spending inane amounts of energy on political discussions rather than technical.
It happened with NodeJS, Kubernetes, LLVM, Tor, Debian all of which are decent projects but kind of 'stuck' now that boards and bug lists are overrun by "complaints" rather than technical discussions. If the SJW's don't get their way, they fork the code, take a number of core developers and none of those forks have actually produced a decent competitor to their parent rather, some of them have spawned their own forks because SJW infighting. Instead of getting a better product, a bunch of energy and time is wasted.
It's happening with Python and Linux now. Expect Linux to slow down immensely.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Exactly, the snowflakes need to understand that criticizing their idea doesn't mean that they as a person are being abused.
But too many people these days think they've been insulted just because someone doesn't agree with them.
Thanks for the edit, but most adults, and even some children, can do this on their own, usually while in the act of reading.
Interesting that your sig is labeling anyone who uses the term SJW a fuckwit. I almost self-edited that out. But that's okay cause being consistent is not in any way a trait of progressives.
and sometimes the only way to shut them the hell up and make them listen is to nuke their ego from orbit and use a few harsh words to drive the point home while you do it.
There is an old leadership principle which goes something like "praise in public, criticize in private".
If your goal is to "nuke someone's ego", then you can do that in private. When you do it in public you 1) look like a dick, and 2) scare away people who very well may have good ideas but don't care to deal with your arrogant and insulting outbursts. Volunteers have a limited amount of time, and a lot of them already understand that wasting their time participating in a system where they can expect to get their ego "nuked" isn't worth it to them.
No, the goal of someone who uses "a few harsh words" in public to criticize others isn't to deal with that one person, it's to demonstrate their own power and scare off anyone else who would dare challenge it.
This method works perfectly in the Military
That you think a software development project has the same needs and concerns as a group where people can be and are ordered to their death, and failure to obey orders can result in other people dying, is interesting. The fact that we are having this discussion shows that no, it does not adapt "nicely" to the software development world. And "nicely" may have been deliberately ironic on your part, but I doubt it.
Linux Community isn't a social network, support group, or law enforcement organization. It has a clearly defined purpose - to produce Linux kernel of best possible quality in shortest amount of time. You are trying to subvert and re-purpose this organization to suit your priorities and in doing so you are presuming to impose your values and your priorities on others. You are welcome to fork Linux and focus forked project on your specific list of priorities.
James Damour. Fired for being right.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
The fact that you actually take issue with things as tiny as Linus calling patches he's explained how they've been badly done "garbage" and what they do "insane" or using the expression of drinking the cool-aid when people refuse to see legitimate problems.
It's one thing to go on one of his really early rants about how he's amazed someone hasn't gotten themselves decapitated by a door and the hypersensitive language policing you're doing. If you really can't stand something as tiny as the slightly harsh language relating to a very serious set of issues then I recommend you get off the internet for a few weeks and try to put your life into perspective because if something as tiny as that irks you, then your priorities could use some re-organizing or you've got a really easy life.
"Why should I want to make anything up? Life's bad enough as it is without wanting to invent any more of it."
You don't see a clear trend in the graph you've provided? Contributions are trending upwards until the CoC is introduced, then they trend downwards until someone quits. I don't think we have enough data to see what the effect on the main contributors quitting is but you can see similar trends in other projects.
I'm not saying LLVM is dead, but as someone else said, there is a huge brain drain BACK to GCC which was the entire reason people jumped onto LLVM.
Same for NodeJS, there too you can see a huge difference, even though the number of contributors has risen, the number of commits goes down. Parts of this has to do that the SJW's split off NodeJS (a fork that is now dead), the leadership thought this was an issue back then, in a panic introduced a CoC which allowed the SJW to persecute another developer, the SJW then split it onto Ayo (now also dead). This drama keeps people from using their free time to do what they want as far as contributions and now they have to deal with leftist politics, it saps people from working on the core projects because either they start working on a fork that doesn't pan out or they just stay away from the drama.
I am a firm believer in free speech. Don't like what someone has to say, then ignore them. Persecutions and witch hunts kill organizations. I've seen it happen locally in various settings too, various clubs are dying because everyone has to introduce 'safe spaces' and falls over each other not to hurt someone's feelings.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com