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]

Date:	Wed, 17 Jul 2013 18:56:16 +0100
From:	Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>
To:	Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@...il.com>
CC:	Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Sarah Sharp <sarah.a.sharp@...ux.intel.com>,
	CAI Qian <caiqian@...hat.com>, David Lang <david@...g.hm>,
	<ksummit-2013-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Darren Hart <dvhart@...ux.intel.com>,
	Olivier Galibert <galibert@...ox.com>,
	stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML

On Wed, 17 Jul 2013, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 12:00 PM, Stefano Stabellini
> <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, 17 Jul 2013, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >> The last thing I want to do is to lower the quality of the kernel just
> >> to get a wider range of developers.
> >
> > Can we stop bringing the quality of the code into the discussion?
> 
> Can you please stop calling open communication abuse?

Open communication is one thing, abuse is another, so I agree with you
there.


> First you have
> to explain *why* it was improper in order to call it abuse, and in the
> few examples that have been shown, it has been explained that the
> behavior was justified (breaking the #1 rule by a lieutenant who
> should know better).

Abuse is never justified, I hope that's clear for everybody.
Two wrongs don't make a right.

So we are down to the definition of verbal abuse.
The Oxford dictionary gives me:

"speak to (someone) in an insulting and offensive way"

For example I think that calling somebody a moron qualifies.



> > I think it's pretty clear that one doesn't need to be verbally abusive
> > in order to stop bad code from getting into the kernel.
> 
> You can think whatever you want, others have already shown that
> changing the tone of the message in the examples would have changed
> the desired effect.
 
I disagree and it is certainly not the case in my experience.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/