linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] bcachefs

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: <20230708152314.lcpepguue3imrt3i@moria.home.lan>
Date:   Sat, 8 Jul 2023 11:23:14 -0400
From:   Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>
To:     Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
Cc:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
        Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
        "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>,
        Josef Bacik <josef@...icpanda.com>,
        torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-bcachefs@...r.kernel.org,
        dchinner@...hat.com, sandeen@...hat.com, bfoster@...hat.com,
        jack@...e.cz, andreas.gruenbacher@...il.com, peterz@...radead.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, dhowells@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] bcachefs

On Sat, Jul 08, 2023 at 11:02:49AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 08, 2023 at 12:31:36AM -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > 
> > I've long thought a more useful CoC would start with "always try to
> > continue the technical conversation in good faith, always try to build
> > off of what other people are saying; don't shut people down".
> 
> Kent, with all due respect, do you not always follow your suggested
> formulation that you've stated above.  That is to say, you do not
> always assume that your conversational partner is trying to raise
> objections in good faith. 

Ted, how do you have a technical conversation with someone who refuses
to say anything concrete, even when you ask them to elaborate on their
objections, and instead just repeats the same vague non-answers?

> You also want to assume that you are the smartest person in the room,
> and if they object, they are Obviously Wrong.

Ok, now you're really reaching.

Anyone who's actually worked with me can tell you I am quick to consider
other people's point of view and quick to admit when I'm wrong.

All I ask is the same courtesy.