linux-kernel - Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1374018809.2249.29.camel@leira.trondhjem.org>
Date:	Tue, 16 Jul 2013 23:53:30 +0000
From:	"Myklebust, Trond" <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com>
To:	Ric Wheeler <ricwheeler@...il.com>
CC:	Sarah Sharp <sarah.a.sharp@...ux.intel.com>,
	David Lang <david@...g.hm>,
	"ksummit-2013-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org" 
	<ksummit-2013-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Darren Hart <dvhart@...ux.intel.com>,
	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Olivier Galibert <galibert@...ox.com>,
	"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML

On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 19:31 -0400, Ric Wheeler wrote:
> On 07/16/2013 07:12 PM, Sarah Sharp wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 06:54:59PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >> On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 15:43 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote:
> >>
> >>> Yes, that's true.  Some kernel developers are better at moderating their
> >>> comments and tone towards individuals who are "sensitive".  Others
> >>> simply don't give a shit.  So we need to figure out how to meet
> >>> somewhere in the middle, in order to establish a baseline of civility.
> >> I have to ask this because I'm thick, and don't really understand,
> >> but ...
> >>
> >> What problem exactly are we trying to solve here?
> > Personal attacks are not cool Steve.  Some people simply don't care if a
> > verbal tirade is directed at them.  Others do not want anyone to attack
> > them personally, but they're fine with people attacking their code.
> >
> > Bystanders that don't understand the kernel community structure are
> > discouraged from contributing because they don't want to be verbally
> > abused, and they really don't want to see either personal attacks or
> > intense belittling, demeaning comments about code.
> >
> > In order to make our community better, we need to figure out where the
> > baseline of "good" behavior is.  We need to define what behavior we want
> > from both maintainers and patch submitters.  E.g. "No regressions" and
> > "don't break userspace" and "no personal attacks".  That needs to be
> > written down somewhere, and it isn't.  If it's documented somewhere,
> > point me to the file in Documentation.  Hint: it's not there.
> >
> > That is the problem.
> >
> > Sarah Sharp
> 
> The problem you are pointing out - and it is a problem - makes us less effective 
> as a community.

Not really. Most of the people who already work as part of this
community are completely used to it. We've created the environment, and
have no problems with it.

Where it could possibly be a problem is when it comes to recruiting
_new_ members to our community. Particularly so given that some
journalists take a special pleasure in reporting particularly juicy
comments and antics. That would tend to scare off a lot of gun-shy
newbies.
On the other hand, it might tend to bias our recruitment toward people
of a more "special" disposition. Perhaps we finally need the services of
a social scientist to help us find out...

-- 
Trond Myklebust
Linux NFS client maintainer

NetApp
Trond.Myklebust@...app.com
www.netapp.com