Who controls glibc? • Hacker News Board

Re: Who controls glibc?

#251

Post by lmitchell » Tue, May 08, 2018, 3:38 AM UTC

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #218

lmitchell wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess I understand the downvotes here, but I really do think you've hit on at least an issue. Maybe not the issue, but it's a pretty big problem. RMS's conduct here is just... pretty inappropriate. Jokes about abortion, rape, race, sexual orientation, etc, etc, are not something you should be touching as the maintainer of a public project, no matter what your opinions are or how strongly you hold them. The glibc ma…

I do care that someone who is a role model and a public figure acts like this. Why? It's fine to be offended. It's his project. Just fork and move on, if necessary.

This ignores both the fact that RMS is much more than just the maintainer of glibc, and the fact that 'just forking' glibc doesn't stop the maintainer from having a significant amount of public influence.

The problem is not anything to do with glibc - it's the conduct of someone who, like it or not, is a role model for a lot of people in the community, and has taken on a very public role.

Re: Who controls glibc?

#252

Post by sillysaurus3 » Tue, May 08, 2018, 3:40 AM UTC

lmitchell wrote: post #251

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do care that someone who is a role model and a public figure acts like this. Why? It's fine to be offended. It's his project. Just fork and move on, if necessary.

This ignores both the fact that RMS is much more than just the maintainer of glibc, and the fact that 'just forking' glibc doesn't stop the maintainer from having a significant amount of public influence. The problem is not anything to do with glibc - it's the conduct of someone who, like it or not, is a role model for a lot of people in the community, and has taken on a very public role.

So?

Policing humor is a trope in dystopian novels for a reason.

If someone wants to make unsightly jokes, you're free to be offended. But implying that it's not acceptable to act that way is probably a bit far.

Re: Who controls glibc?

#253

Post by mycall » Tue, May 08, 2018, 3:42 AM UTC

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #200

tptacek wrote: post #173

Lots of people seem to be rooting around like truffle hogs looking for the partisan politics embedded in this story, but you won't find any. The conflict happening here is between maintainers, who don't want a dated left-leaning joke embedded in the glibc documentation, and Stallman, who does. If there's "political correctness" involved, it's right-leaning. But, as a left-leaning pro-choice person: there's no "politi…

Spot on. At the end of the day, nobody really cares about the joke, and nobody in the conversation indicated they actually were offended or upset by it, as far as I can tell. The joke will not be the downfall of glibc whether it stays or goes. But RMS' order may be. He just reminded everyone working on that project that their authority ends on any given issue wherever RMS' whims begin.

Lets think how many hours RMS has put into GNU over the years. That should count for something, no?

Re: Who controls glibc?

#254

Post by gumby » Tue, May 08, 2018, 3:43 AM UTC

This is the kind of attitude that lead to forking gcc, the formation of the steering committee etc: https://gcc.gnu.org/news/announcement.html

Re: Who controls glibc?

#255

Post by jsmthrowaway » Tue, May 08, 2018, 3:48 AM UTC

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #252

lmitchell wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This ignores both the fact that RMS is much more than just the maintainer of glibc, and the fact that 'just forking' glibc doesn't stop the maintainer from having a significant amount of public influence. The problem is not anything to do with glibc - it's the conduct of someone who, like it or not, is a role model for a lot of people in the community, and has taken on a very public role.

So? Policing humor is a trope in dystopian novels for a reason. If someone wants to make unsightly jokes, you're free to be offended. But implying that it's not acceptable to act that way is probably a bit far.

Counter to your glorious Fahrenheit 451 perception of either contemporary society or our future one, it’s just as dystopian to permit humor to be used as suppression of a marginalized subset of people. It is perfectly acceptable to expect that people not discriminate against others that are unlike them, in any way, lest that be a possibility. The key to humor that is actually funny is understanding that, particularly how the word I intentionally emphasized applies to comedy.

(Not saying that happened here, just reacting to your broadening to “policing humor.” Humor is also, you know, funny. That did happen here. Stallman should stick to his day gig.)

Re: Who controls glibc?

#256

Post by tptacek » Tue, May 08, 2018, 3:50 AM UTC

flukus wrote: post #236

geofft wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always find these discussions weird, as a Christian who believes in the literal reality of hell. (I hope it will be empty, but I have no reason to believe that other than hope, and I must realistically admit that plenty of people appear to die in a state of mortal sin.) Being respectful of others , even in a codified way, is in no way an affront to my non-PC beliefs. I'm not going to start having opinions about whe…

I think you're ignoring that witch hunting that has been going on in recent years. As a hypothetical, let's say that you believe all homosexuals will go to hell. Of course in a project or a workplace their will never be a need to bring this up and being respectful of others you never bring it up in those environments. But what about other environments? Should you be able to express your belief on your personal twitte…

None of this has anything to do with what's going on in this story.

Re: Who controls glibc?

#257

Post by jkFeiwi » Tue, May 08, 2018, 3:51 AM UTC

slededit wrote: post #249

jkFeiwi wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't an easter egg, nor a comment in the code. It's dab smack in the manual. Could distract or confuse someone just trying to look up a function. I say we keep the fun expression stuff in places where it won't get in the user's way of doing their job.

Manuals used to be fun too - except for IBM's, those were never fun.

Jokes may be fun to write. But when you're scouring a manual for a needed function, and you're confronted with a smarmy joke, it probably won't be as fun (especially if you're reading the manual to troubleshoot something.)

Re: Who controls glibc?

#258

Post by sillysaurus3 » Tue, May 08, 2018, 3:53 AM UTC

jsmthrowaway wrote: post #255

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So? Policing humor is a trope in dystopian novels for a reason. If someone wants to make unsightly jokes, you're free to be offended. But implying that it's not acceptable to act that way is probably a bit far.

Counter to your glorious Fahrenheit 451 perception of either contemporary society or our future one, it’s just as dystopian to permit humor to be used as suppression of a marginalized subset of people. It is perfectly acceptable to expect that people not discriminate against others that are unlike them, in any way, lest that be a possibility. The key to humor that is actually funny is understanding that, particularly…

Isn't it a little hyperbolic to imply that an offhanded joke is suppressing a marginalized subset of people? Or that it was discriminatory?

Here's his full reply in context:

https://lwn.net/Articles/753654/

Re: Who controls glibc?

#259

Post by quotemstr » Tue, May 08, 2018, 3:55 AM UTC

slededit wrote: post #248

quotemstr wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even today, the Windows source code contains quite a few long, narrative comments that are both historically educational and entertaining to read.

Shortly before I left someone on the coding standards committee espoused the idea that good code was code where you couldn't tell who wrote it. I feel as though the last vestiges of the BillG era died that day.

I've never liked style committees. I've never seen one do anything to actually improve code comprehension, but I've seen plenty of bullshit that kills velocity and sucks all the joy out of programming.

Re: Who controls glibc?

#260

Post by mikekchar » Tue, May 08, 2018, 3:55 AM UTC

mycall wrote: post #253

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spot on. At the end of the day, nobody really cares about the joke, and nobody in the conversation indicated they actually were offended or upset by it, as far as I can tell. The joke will not be the downfall of glibc whether it stays or goes. But RMS' order may be. He just reminded everyone working on that project that their authority ends on any given issue wherever RMS' whims begin.

Lets think how many hours RMS has put into GNU over the years. That should count for something, no?

I'm a big fan of RMS, but I've got to say "No". He's not a maintainer. He doesn't get a vote. If he wants to work his way back into that project, then I've got no problem with it. But he doesn't. It's like the CEO telling you that he wants a joke in the technical documentation for one of your libraries. They might get away with it because of their position, but it's an abuse of that position even if the CEO used to be coder #1 on the project.

Not that it doesn't happen all over the place...