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."

Comments

Re:Am I missing something?

[CoolVibe]

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.

Can't be examined in isolation

[Etcetera]

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:

A Code of Conduct for Open Source Projects
Open Source has always been a foundation of the Internet, and with the advent of social open source networks this is more true than ever. But free, libre, and open source projects suffer from a startling lack of diversity, with dramatically low representation by women, people of color, and other marginalized populations.

Part of this problem lies with the very structure of some projects: the use of insensitive language, thoughtless use of pronouns, assumptions of gender, and even sexualized or culturally insensitive names.

Marginalized people also suffer some of the unintended consequences of dogmatic insistence on meritocratic principles of governance. Studies have shown that organizational cultures that value meritocracy often result in greater inequality.

From the PMM:

Meritocracy is a founding principle of the open source movement, and the ideal of meritocracy is perpetuated throughout our field in the way people are recruited, hired, retained, promoted, and valued.

But meritocracy has consistently shown itself to mainly benefit those with privilege, to the exclusion of underrepresented people in technology. The idea of merit is in fact never clearly defined; rather, it seems to be a form of recognition, an acknowledgement that “this person is valuable insofar as they are like me.”

(If you are not familiar with criticisms of meritocracy, please refer to the resources on this page.)

It is time that we as an industry abandon the notion that merit is something that can be measured, can be pursued on equal terms by every individual, and can ever be distributed fairly.

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"

Linux: survived Microsoft, killed by SJWs

[IGnatius T Foobar]

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.

Re:Linux: survived Microsoft, killed by SJWs

[Anonymous Coward]

"The end of Linux as we know it"? Gee, overreach much?

No, it won't be the end of Linux as we know it. If anything it could make Linux better by not pushing away code contributors thanks to a sometimes toxic community.

The issue, which you surely know and are willfully ignoring/misrepresenting is NOT that my code cares about your feelings, but that people in the development community shouldn't be assholes when dealing with each other.

And you can write good code in a "Safe Space". I've worked at several companies that had very strict rules about conduct in code reviews, problem reporting, and, more generally, meetings. And you know what? We did good and sometimes great work, because we could focus on our work, the stuff we loved about coding, and not the petty personal crap that tends to creep into nearly all workplaces. If someone got out of line, no one even had to complain; word of what happened would inevitably get to mgmt who would discreetly step in, talk to the offender behind closed doors, and that would be the end of it.

If you value your opportunities to be a jerk more than creating a comfortable, productive work environment, then there's nothing anyone can do to help you.

Re:Linux: survived Microsoft, killed by SJWs

[frank_adrian314159]

You can't develop good code in a Safe Space.

Personally, I don't see how you develop good software in the middle of a jerk factory bro party either other than by pure luck. But that's me.

Re:Wheaton's law - Don't be a Dick

[jimmifett]

Except Wheaton is one of the biggest violators of that.

Re:Code of Conduct - Exact Text

[bsDaemon]

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.

Re:fun game out of context, totally apropos:

[wed128]

Yeah, but he's right.

It's going to be a bad thing

[MikeRT]

This is going to be what is used most of the time:

* Using welcoming and inclusive language

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.

Re: fun game out of context, totally apropos:

[Archangel Michael]

Ever deal with a retard that thinks himself a genius? Sometimes being offensive is the only way to blow past the idiocy efficiently.

Re:Oh thank god

[Reservoir Penguin]

Well how many? And how many bullshit ideas were accepted because criticizing == triggering or worse denying "lived-in experience"?

Somebody Else's Problem

[nagora]

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.

Re:Oh thank god

[Crashmarik]

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

Re: fun game out of context, totally apropos:

[Penguinisto]

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.

Re:Oh thank god

[iMadeGhostzilla]

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.

Re:Code of Conduct - Exact Text

[guruevi]

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.

Re: Oh thank god

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re: fun game out of context, totally apropos:

[Obfuscant]

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.