A Case Study in Not Being a Jerk in Open Source • Hacker News Board

Re: A Case Study in Not Being a Jerk in Open Source

#31

Post by yitchelle » Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 7:11 PM UTC

lucideer wrote: post #6

If Linus had written the reworded email the author is proposing here, this author wouldn't be writing this blog post, and we wouldn't be clicking it on HN and reading the contents of Linus' points. As to the actual detail of the author's proposed rewordings: > I'm not talking about the changes themselves - I can live with them. But the _rationale_ is pure and utter garbage, and dangerously so. becomes > These changes…

> If Linus had written the reworded email the author is proposing here, this author wouldn't be writing this blog post, and we wouldn't be clicking it on HN and reading the contents of Linus' points.

It is actually a positive rather than negative if author was not motivated to write his blog post by the Linus rant/abuse. It would have meant the Linus was able to get the message across with his abrasive style.

Re: A Case Study in Not Being a Jerk in Open Source

#32

Post by na85 » Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 7:39 PM UTC

pmiller2 wrote: post #11

na85 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I categorically disagree that the revised email makes the same case. The first sentence that Linus wrote indicates that he finds it questionable, but the revised statement puts words into Linus' mouth: "this looks ok but..." That's not even the same sentiment. Okay versus Questionable. Not sure why the Tone Police feel it's necessary to do this.

He clearly doesn’t have a problem with the code, otherwise he wouldn’t say he could “live with” the changes. This portion could be better worded to convey the “code is ok, but the rationale is flawed” message. How would you rewrite it?

Au contraire I think it is patently obvious that he does have a problem with the code as written, otherwise why spend the energy to rebut it so vigorously?

Re: A Case Study in Not Being a Jerk in Open Source

#33

Post by ng12 » Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 7:51 PM UTC

ivraatiems wrote: post #24

tomatotomato37 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. The revised email is respectful and courteous, but it is also woefully forgetful. While you shouldn't do it all the time, there are times when you just really need to drive a point home

Why do you have to insult people on a personal level to drive points home?

Right. Linus and the author are both wrong. You can be forceful and direct with your language -- you just probably shouldn't be using ad hominem insults.

Re: A Case Study in Not Being a Jerk in Open Source

#34

Post by s2g » Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 8:13 PM UTC

hitekker wrote: post #7

Linus seems like a jerk if you see him as an entitled engineer maintaining a popular OSS library. But if you instead see him as a CEO, responsible for every single part of the Linux kernel, running on one billion machines, his behavior becomes natural. Even warranted, since, often-times the people at the recieving end of his wrath are not making some whoops-daisy technical mistake; they are trying to exert power and…

> Linus seems like a jerk

Linus is a jerk and he gets away with it entirely because apologists like you make excuses for him at every turn.

He's a dictator. he can say no and leave it at that. He can say no and explain. Acting like a jerk is not a necessary part of this process.

Re: A Case Study in Not Being a Jerk in Open Source

#35

Post by s2g » Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 8:46 PM UTC

> These changes look OK, but I'm not sure about the rationale.

That's a weaker statement to me.

"The changes look OK, but I strongly disagree with the rationale" sounds better.

Re: A Case Study in Not Being a Jerk in Open Source

#36

Post by hitekker » Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 8:48 PM UTC

nlawalker wrote: post #14

hitekker wrote: post #7

Linus seems like a jerk if you see him as an entitled engineer maintaining a popular OSS library. But if you instead see him as a CEO, responsible for every single part of the Linux kernel, running on one billion machines, his behavior becomes natural. Even warranted, since, often-times the people at the recieving end of his wrath are not making some whoops-daisy technical mistake; they are trying to exert power and…

>> the stakes are enormous This is the key difference between kernel development and other volunteer efforts. Most volunteer efforts are worse off when people are scared away by strong language and pointed explanations of their shortcomings because their performance isn't really that important. It's not that big of a deal if you spill something at the food kitchen or goof up part of the set of the school play. The ke…

Correct. The “volunteer” part means that Linus’s formal authority is actually quite limited.

In a company the Boss can fire the incompetent or malicious. Not so with Linux; The BFDL has to constantly poke and prod the community away from its impulses.

The truth is that leadership without formal authority is messy. It only gets messier as the problems becomes more important and as more people get involved.

The alternative to outbursts is hierarchy; for Linux to structure itself even more, endowing Linus with even more power, such that he could temporarily suspend the contributor at his discretion.

No insults, no screeds, just a silent squelch.

A far neater outcome that would also be anathema to the politically unconscious.

Re: A Case Study in Not Being a Jerk in Open Source

#37

Post by s2g » Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 8:55 PM UTC

nlawalker wrote: post #14

hitekker wrote: post #7

Linus seems like a jerk if you see him as an entitled engineer maintaining a popular OSS library. But if you instead see him as a CEO, responsible for every single part of the Linux kernel, running on one billion machines, his behavior becomes natural. Even warranted, since, often-times the people at the recieving end of his wrath are not making some whoops-daisy technical mistake; they are trying to exert power and…

>> the stakes are enormous This is the key difference between kernel development and other volunteer efforts. Most volunteer efforts are worse off when people are scared away by strong language and pointed explanations of their shortcomings because their performance isn't really that important. It's not that big of a deal if you spill something at the food kitchen or goof up part of the set of the school play. The ke…

I'm not sure why you think that skilled people who won't walk away and go devote their time to a project where they don't have to put up with an asshole boss and his army of apologists.

Re: A Case Study in Not Being a Jerk in Open Source

#38

Post by gary_bernhardt » Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 9:21 PM UTC

s2g wrote: post #35

> These changes look OK, but I'm not sure about the rationale. That's a weaker statement to me. "The changes look OK, but I strongly disagree with the rationale" sounds better.

You're right; I should've written the second thing. Too late to change it now, but I would if I could do it without causing confusion.

Re: A Case Study in Not Being a Jerk in Open Source

#39

Post by zachrose » Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 11:11 PM UTC

nlawalker wrote: post #14

hitekker wrote: post #7

Linus seems like a jerk if you see him as an entitled engineer maintaining a popular OSS library. But if you instead see him as a CEO, responsible for every single part of the Linux kernel, running on one billion machines, his behavior becomes natural. Even warranted, since, often-times the people at the recieving end of his wrath are not making some whoops-daisy technical mistake; they are trying to exert power and…

>> the stakes are enormous This is the key difference between kernel development and other volunteer efforts. Most volunteer efforts are worse off when people are scared away by strong language and pointed explanations of their shortcomings because their performance isn't really that important. It's not that big of a deal if you spill something at the food kitchen or goof up part of the set of the school play. The ke…

But is Linus actually telling anyone to go away for the good of the project?

Re: A Case Study in Not Being a Jerk in Open Source

#40

Post by hyperpape » Fri, Jun 22, 2018, 12:07 AM UTC

lucideer wrote: post #6

If Linus had written the reworded email the author is proposing here, this author wouldn't be writing this blog post, and we wouldn't be clicking it on HN and reading the contents of Linus' points. As to the actual detail of the author's proposed rewordings: > I'm not talking about the changes themselves - I can live with them. But the _rationale_ is pure and utter garbage, and dangerously so. becomes > These changes…

Debatable. Linus’s original email is unclear. “I can live with them” is badly ambiguous between:

1. Bad, but I won’t swear at you.

2. I’m not sure what I think, might be ok but needs more discussion

3. Merge them, but I want to swear about the proposed reason, because it’s bad.

I think 3 is the least likely, but nothing in the email unambiguously rules it out. I think 2 is the most likely interpretation.

There’s something funny about people saying “Linus’s style is valuable because he makes things clear” in response to a post where we can’t agree on what he meant.