Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Linus Torvalds won't do github pull requests

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 288 posts

Re: Linus Torvalds won't do github pull requests

#271

Post by oijaf888 »

spinlock wrote: post #39

Man, now I feel like a total hack. I love the github pull request. I do insist that my devs use a good style (i.e. first line is a summary and wrap at 80 chars) but I love the user interface for looking at diffs and doing a code review. I had no idea it was inferior until reading this and now I find myself in the awkward position that I don't care. Have I really become the guy who values an efficient team process mor…

I doubt your devs number as many as the kernel contributors nor are they working as independently. Perhaps "esoteric specifications" exist for a reason on a massive project which has seen and tried many things in the past 20 years.

If your devs commit bad code its probably pretty easy for you to find them and possibly fire them. If you can't tell who a kernel patch is from or even if it is actually from the person specified it calls into question the security of the kernel.

Re: Linus Torvalds won't do github pull requests

#272

Post by oijaf888 »

nwmcsween wrote: post #205
chj wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please name one project out performing Linux kernel in terms of your definition of code quality. I'd like to have a surprise.

Define code quality: braindead GNU extensions such as nested functions - Linux uses that, How about the separation of DM and MD due to ego's, how every driver without a lib (such as libata) warranting a few exceptions has to rewrite boilerplate for basic things - frame buffer drivers are a good example. How about the syscall bugs - look into glibc if you feel like gouging your eyes out or jemalloc for more tame code.…

You know jemalloc was originally written for FreeBSD?

Re: Linus Torvalds won't do github pull requests

#273

Post by flomo »

gft wrote: post #264
mst wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of us who're less old interact that way too, and find it a hell of a lot more efficient than trying to be nice. The point of technical fora is to have effective, high bandwidth discussions on technical matters. If I want a hug, I can go get a real one from a real live human being - and I'll interact with them in an appropriate way for that context, too.

Linus may be an ass at times but he has earned that right, and is one of the few people from whom an abrasive attitude is tolerated. I would strongly caution you that most people do not find that sort of attitude acceptable. And yes, this is a throwaway account. It might be worth considering why I created it to respond to you, just based on your post above.

chicken/egg: One of the reason Torvolds is so respected as a leader is because he knows how to win a technical argument.

Re: Linus Torvalds won't do github pull requests

#274

Post by natep »

jasonwatkinspdx wrote: post #261
natep wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

2. He clearly stated his reasons why his text wrapping approach is objectively superior (not correct). If you think he's delusional, point out the criterion he has failed to consider, or explain how some other system meets any of his criteria better. In response to the pull request he did simply say "I don't do github pull requests." and explained why, and basically said he would if github supported commit messages i…

The idea that one text wrapping approach is objectively superior for all purposes is incoherent. By that I mean it is an impossible claim given our most accurate understanding of epistemology.

Did he say it was for 'all purposes'? He said 50 characters for the first line is ideal for shortlogs, and 72 characters for more verbose logs, etc, when viewed in a terminal. He also said that encoding word wrap at write-time is better because only the author knows how to appropriately wrap. As he said, sometimes lines go longer, if the commit message includes program output that shouldn't be altered. So, you can't relegate word wrapping to the presentation layer without an unreasonably smart algorithm.

I interpret his statements to mean that the git/kernel projects' commit message standards are objectively better on all the ways we know how to measure (or at least, for all of the most common ways of looking at commit messages). So again, if you want to disagree, your choices are to point out a criterion that is not being considered, or how this system is not better at a known criterion.

Re: Linus Torvalds won't do github pull requests

#275

Post by donpark »

pimeys wrote: post #232
kylemaxwell wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In that vein, when somebody tells Linus: "You might have fun raging on the internet, but I think your goals would be better served if..." He rightly responds: "Umm. I think I've been able to reach my goals on the internet better than most people." I believe in civility and courtesy in many areas, and Linus doesn't phrase things exactly as I would. But then, I don't have his responsibility or experiences, either - and…

It's kind of Finnish way of expressing things. We might say "jos sä teet tän näin, voisit vetää ittes hirteen" (if you do it like this, you might want to hang yourself) without actually meaning it literally. We have less PC compared to many other countries and I still find it refreshing while living outside of the country.

Finnish expressions are like Korean expressions. "나가 죽어" is a common Korean expression meaning "go outside and die."

Re: Linus Torvalds won't do github pull requests

#276

Post by tytso »

jasonwatkinspdx wrote: post #189
mindstab wrote: post #85

The man wrote git for use on the Linux kernel. Trying to argue with him about how to use git with respect to your tiny patch to the Linux kernel seems... like missing the point on a great many things. The rules for submitting kernel patches are laid out in great detail. Do you really thing arguing with the gatekeeper is going to change anything?

I think people are arguing for two reasons: 1.) Linus is being a bully. There's a difference between speaking your mind openly and using rhetorical force to invalidate contrary views. 2.) The kernel requirements can be whatever those who control the kernel demand. That's just common sense. Making the leap to declaring that only one text wrapping approach is objectively correct is delusional. If Linus simply said "The…

Contrary views like "Linus's shit doesn't stink"?

Actually, I think Linus was factually correct. The persons involved were morons. :-)

Re: Linus Torvalds won't do github pull requests

#277

Post by giis »

I can see two stupid comments by pirtlj (https://github.com/pirtlj)

>pirtlj commented on pull request 17 on torvalds/linux a day ago Ouch my feelings are broken... I just wish you would live up to your image, but then again you're just an imperfect human too.

>pirtlj commented on pull request 17 on torvalds/linux a day ago I did not realizes that Linus' shit does not stink. Thanks for clearing that up...

Re: Linus Torvalds won't do github pull requests

#278

Post by mst »

gft wrote: post #264
mst wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of us who're less old interact that way too, and find it a hell of a lot more efficient than trying to be nice. The point of technical fora is to have effective, high bandwidth discussions on technical matters. If I want a hug, I can go get a real one from a real live human being - and I'll interact with them in an appropriate way for that context, too.

Linus may be an ass at times but he has earned that right, and is one of the few people from whom an abrasive attitude is tolerated. I would strongly caution you that most people do not find that sort of attitude acceptable. And yes, this is a throwaway account. It might be worth considering why I created it to respond to you, just based on your post above.

Wheras mine isn't a throwaway and I never use them, for reasons I shall endeavour to make clear.

My opinion is my opinion, and you're welcome to hold a different one, but I'll damn well stand behind holding mine and explain the reasons why I do as myself, with my reputation and my ability and everything I've ever said attached to it, including the stupid, horrible mistakes (of which this post may later seem to me to be one :). Because the fact that I do my best to make less such mistakes every year speaks for me as well.

You are absolutely right that it is worth considering why you created an anonymous coward account, as slashdot calls them, rather than speaking your opinions as yourself - no matter how strongly you disagree with me I respect your right to do so even if I have no respect at all for your arguments or position. But now I have no way to know you, and no way to respond to a human being rather than a (to me) meaningless transient front so I don't really feel like I can draw any useful conclusions from such consideration.

I don't know why you'd want that.

If you want to disagree with me, disagree with me as -you-, so I know who I'm debating with and can frame a constructive reply.

Perhaps the fact that I would rather disagree honestly with another human being, and that you would ... I don't know what you'd rather ... is the point. Perhaps it isn't. But now I can't know.

Arguing for "most people" holds no weight with me when I'm unable to even confirm that you're a person. Maybe I'm too web 1.0 or something. If so, sorry.

Please do, however, consider responding to me authentically; I'm always willing to debate whether I'm right or not, but I've always been rather fonder of debating people than will-o-the-wisps.

Maybe that's just me. Deciding that is left as an exercise to the reader :)

Re: Linus Torvalds won't do github pull requests

#279

Post by mst »

chromatic wrote: post #265
mst wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of us who're less old interact that way too, and find it a hell of a lot more efficient than trying to be nice. The point of technical fora is to have effective, high bandwidth discussions on technical matters. If I want a hug, I can go get a real one from a real live human being - and I'll interact with them in an appropriate way for that context, too.

Other options exist between good old-fashioned flamewar and hugging it out. Look right now; we're disagreeing without slinging verbal abuse.

Are we? I don't believe you've disagreed with a word I said.

Of course such options exist. Honest and authentic communication is a crucial tool to avoid disagreement descending into flamewars.

Linus' original post attracted a message from an original developer saying "yeah, I hate that too, we'll try and get round to fixing it". That suggests that his choice of option was really rather constructive, peanut gallery interruptions to the useful parts aside.

Re: Linus Torvalds won't do github pull requests

#280

Post by chromatic »

mst wrote: post #279
chromatic wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Other options exist between good old-fashioned flamewar and hugging it out. Look right now; we're disagreeing without slinging verbal abuse.

Are we? I don't believe you've disagreed with a word I said. Of course such options exist. Honest and authentic communication is a crucial tool to avoid disagreement descending into flamewars. Linus' original post attracted a message from an original developer saying "yeah, I hate that too, we'll try and get round to fixing it". That suggests that his choice of option was really rather constructive, peanut gallery in…

Certainly!

I disagree with Linus's digression to insult a member of the peanut gallery, no matter how useless and unnecessary said member's interjection. In my mind, a "No, that's wrong." is sufficient if it even merits comment.

Post reply on HN