Message-ID: <2e47wkookxa2w6l2hv4qt2776jrjw5lyukul27nqhyqp5fsyq2@5mvbmay7qn2g>
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2025 00:13:22 -0400
From: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>
To: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Cc: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, Josef Bacik <josef@...icpanda.com>, 
	Aquinas Admin <admin@...inas.su>, Malte Schröder <malte.schroeder@...ip.de>, 
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, "Carl E. Thompson" <list-bcachefs@...lthompson.net>, 
	linux-bcachefs@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] bcachefs changes for 6.17

On Sun, Aug 10, 2025 at 12:05:28AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 09, 2025 at 11:17:44PM -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 09, 2025 at 10:24:36PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > > And how did you respond?  By criticizing another file system, and
> > > talking about how wonderful you believe bcachefs to be, all of which
> > > is beside the point.  In fact, you once again demonstrated exactly why
> > > a very large number of kernel deevlopers have decided you are
> > > extremely toxic, and have been clamoring that your code be ejected
> > > from the kernel.  Not because of the code, but because your behavior.
> > 
> > I would dearly love to have not opened that up, but "let's now delete
> > bcachefs from the kernel" opened up that discussion, because our first
> > priority has to be doing right by users - and a decision like that
> > should absolutely be discussed publicly, well in advance, with all
> > technical arguments put forth.
> 
> Kent,
> 
> You say our first priority has to be doing right by users, and I agree -
> but doing right by users means maintaining a healthy, functioning
> development community. A toxic community that drives away contributors
> fails its users far more severely than the absence of any single
> filesystem ever could.
> 
> Look at this thread again. Really look at it. Neither Ted nor Josef
> raised a single technical argument against bcachefs. They didn't
> criticize your code, your design decisions, or your engineering. Josef
> explicitly praised your technical work. Ted has repeatedly shown respect
> for your code.  The discussions about potentially dropping bcachefs
> aren't happening because it's technically inferior to ext4, xfs, or
> btrfs. They're happening because your personal interactions are
> undermining the health of the community that maintains all of these
> filesystems.
> 
> > "Work as service to others" is something I think worth thinking about.
> > We're not supposed to be in this for ourselves; I don't write code to
> > stroke my own ego, I do it to be useful.
> 
> Service to others includes maintaining professional relationships with
> your colleagues. It includes building rather than tearing down. It
> includes recognizing that a healthy community serves users better in the
> long run than any individual contribution, no matter how technically
> excellent.
> 
> The kernel has thrived for over 30 years not just because of technical
> excellence, but because it has (mostly) maintained a collaborative
> environment where developers can work together despite disagreements.
> That collaborative environment IS doing right by users.
> 
> No filesystem is worth destroying that.

Then can we please drop all this madness?

I do hereby solomnly swear that I will refrain from critizing btrfs ever
again, or any other code anywhere in the kernel (if that is the wish) -
as long as Linus stops trying to dictate on patches internal to
fs/bcachefs/.

If it affects the rest of the kernel, that's fair game; I just want to
be able to get work done.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists