301–310 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok, so you are just "spreading awareness" but Linus is "indicting". I guess it is good if you and Linus go their separate ways.
This is a rude comment that isn't downvoted because of hive mind effects. Not biting.
Linux said no brigading. Hector resigns twice and in the second time, despite saying he wouldn’t elaborate on Rust vs Linux, proceeds to blame Linus and start another social media brigade.
Marcan links to an email by Ted Tso'o ( https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20250208204416.GL1130956@mit.ed... ) that is interesting to read. Although it starts on a polarising note ("thin blue line"), it does a good job of explaining the difficulties that Linux maintainers face and why they make the choices they do. It makes sense to be extremely adversarial about accepting code because they're on the hook for maintaining…
The most charitable interpretation I can imagine is that the Rust-in-Linux project needs specific nightly features, and those don't get stability guarantees. But I think this is still pretty unfair to complain about; my impression is there's a lot of appetite on the Rust side to get those stabilized.
I also think...
> we know, through very bitter experience, that 95+% of the time, once the code is accepted, the engineers which contribute the code will disappear, never to be seen again.
...that while there's truth in this, there's also a large extent to which it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. Someone might want to stick it out to get their work into mainstream once, but then take a look at the process once it's in the mirror and say never again.
...and:
> Instead of complaining about maintainers for who are unreasonably caring about these things, when they are desparately under-resourced to do as good of a job as they industry demands, how about meeting us half-way and helping us with these sort of long-term code health issues?
It's really hard for me to not see "let's actually write down the contract for these functions, ideally via the type system" as doing exactly that. Which seems to me to be the central idea Ted Ts'o was ranting about in that infamous video.
> But then also came the entitled users. This time, it wasn’t about stealing games, it was about features. “When is Thunderbolt coming?” “Asahi is useless to me until I can use monitors over USB-C” “The battery life sucks compared to macOS” (nobody ever complained when compared to x86 laptops…) “I can’t even check my CPU temperature” (yes, I seriously got that one). This sounds so rough. I can't imagine pouring your…
Open source attracts some of the very worst users. Often people pretending to be trying to help by "suggesting improvements", but just as often entitled people who want to work for free. I don't think policies will change that. It's just something you have to accept when you provide something useful to lots of people for free. Even if you use moderated environments for user feedback (adding the burden of constantly b…
Anyway, if your project involves convincing hundreds of maintainers to increase their cognitive/work load in order to include your fancy new foreign workflow breaking language into their project, you have to expect pushback.
Marcan links to an email by Ted Tso'o ( https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20250208204416.GL1130956@mit.ed... ) that is interesting to read. Although it starts on a polarising note ("thin blue line"), it does a good job of explaining the difficulties that Linux maintainers face and why they make the choices they do. It makes sense to be extremely adversarial about accepting code because they're on the hook for maintaining…
Thank you to share the Ted T'so LKM post. Can you explain the culture reference "thin blue line"? I never heard it before.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You can literally shove facts in someone's face, and they won't admit to being wrong or misunderstand, and instead continue to argue against some points whose premise isn't even true. I think that's part of the gag. "These people are members of a community who care about where they live... So what I hear is people caring very loudly at me." -- Leslie Knope https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=areUGfOHkMA
>"These people are members of a community who care about where they live... So what I hear is people caring very loudly at me." -- Leslie Knope that's a very healthy and - I feel - correct attitude towards this kind of criticism. I love when wisdom comes from stupid places.
Satisfied customers will tell you they think your stuff is great, but dissatisfied customers will be able to hone in on exactly where the problem is.
You can even extend this to personal life: if someone tells you your shabby car doesn't fit with the nice suits you wear, you can either take it as a personal attack and get irritated, or take it as feedback and wash your car, spruce up the upholstery and replace the missing wheel cap. In effect they helped you take note of something.
> But then also came the entitled users. This time, it wasn’t about stealing games, it was about features. “When is Thunderbolt coming?” “Asahi is useless to me until I can use monitors over USB-C” “The battery life sucks compared to macOS” (nobody ever complained when compared to x86 laptops…) “I can’t even check my CPU temperature” (yes, I seriously got that one). This sounds so rough. I can't imagine pouring your…
Open source attracts some of the very worst users. Often people pretending to be trying to help by "suggesting improvements", but just as often entitled people who want to work for free. I don't think policies will change that. It's just something you have to accept when you provide something useful to lots of people for free. Even if you use moderated environments for user feedback (adding the burden of constantly b…
In those days, I was part of a core development team for a project with a fairly large community. A few bad users and a few bad development team members is all it takes to poison something like that.
Now I barely even contribute to Open Source projects even when I fix them for my own uses.
Marcan links to an email by Ted Tso'o ( https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20250208204416.GL1130956@mit.ed... ) that is interesting to read. Although it starts on a polarising note ("thin blue line"), it does a good job of explaining the difficulties that Linux maintainers face and why they make the choices they do. It makes sense to be extremely adversarial about accepting code because they're on the hook for maintaining…
Thank you to share the Ted T'so LKM post. Can you explain the culture reference "thin blue line"? I never heard it before.
I'm not sure about why they are upset with the issue of upstreaming the changes into the kernal. They want to upstream drivers for a device that the creator of clearly has no interest in allowing others to use outside of their walled garden. The knowledge around it is from a massive , albeit impressive, RE effort. Who is going to support it? Where is the demand for it? It would be different if Apple were to provide p…
Agreed, supporting apple devices is going to be a maintenance nightmare as it goes against the wishes of apple. At best, apple involuntarily makes reverse incompatible changes which breaks the drivers and at worst apple specifically sabotages the drivers to keep people in the walled garden. This may be controversial but you also don’t have a right to merge in code to the kernel. If the maintainers don’t want rust cod…
Apple explicitly chose to provide a way to boot third-party operating systems when designing how the M-series SoC boots. Their SoC stuff dates in some components AFAIK back to the very first iPod SoCs in its design.
I would understand that attitude if someone wished to, say, upstream code for PlayStations or other game consoles because that is a bunch of fights waiting to happen, but Apple hasn't made any move directly against FOSS OSes on their computers in the past and there is no reason to believe that will change.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not just that "people are hard" - it was clear that this will end up this way the moment marcan started ranting on social media about having to send kernel patches via e-mails. Collaborating on software development is a social activity and stuff like convincing maintainers to trust you and your approach is just as important part of it (if not more important) as writing code. Not realizing that is a sure road to…
> it was clear that this will end up this way the moment marcan started ranting on social media about having to send kernel patches via e-mails. Collaborating on software development is a social activity and stuff like convincing maintainers to trust you and your approach is just as important part of it (if not more important) as writing code. Yeah but FFS using email for patches when there are so much better ways of…
...which doesn't matter at all.
The people in charge decided on their preferred ways of communication. You may believe that there are better ways out there, and I may even agree with you, but ultimately it's completely irrelevant. People responsible decided that this is what works for them and, to be honest, they don't even owe you an explanation. You're being asked to collaborate in this specific way and if you're unable to do it, it's on you. If you want to change it, work your way to become a person who decides on this stuff in the project, or convince the people already responsible. Notice how neither of those are technical tasks and that they don't depend on technical superiority of your proposed methods either.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But the point is that the Rust developers have tried literally everything else. If the C developers make it a "Them vs Us" thing, there IS NO ALTERNATIVE for the Rust developers. Linus' reaction is quite literally the equivalent of a parent only punishing the loudest child, not the child that's been silently bullying that kid for months.
Don't know what to tell you. The C developers have the keys of the kingdom. It's up to the rust devs to appease them. When you are a new-comer to an old project a big part of that is working with the current gatekeepers to get your changes through in a way they'll accept. That can sometimes mean doing things sub optimally in your view. In particular, the DMA maintainer didn't want rust code in their DMA subsystem. Th…
The workplace equivalent is your CEO making a public statement that your work is to be supported, then not firing people who openly gloat about their intent to sabotage your work.