From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757217AbXG1UHa (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Jul 2007 16:07:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751901AbXG1UHY (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Jul 2007 16:07:24 -0400 Received: from adsl-69-232-92-238.dsl.sndg02.pacbell.net ([69.232.92.238]:56457 "EHLO gnuppy.monkey.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751360AbXG1UHX (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Jul 2007 16:07:23 -0400 Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 13:07:05 -0700 To: jos poortvliet Cc: Linus Torvalds , ck@vds.kolivas.org, Michael Chang , Kasper Sandberg , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "Bill Huey (hui)" Subject: Re: [ck] Re: Linus 2.6.23-rc1 Message-ID: <20070728200705.GF32582@gnuppy.monkey.org> References: <200707282003.45142.jos@mijnkamer.nl> <200707282128.39906.jos@mijnkamer.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200707282128.39906.jos@mijnkamer.nl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-11) From: Bill Huey (hui) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Jul 28, 2007 at 09:28:36PM +0200, jos poortvliet wrote: > Your point here seems to be: this is how it went, and it was right. Ok, got > that. Yet, Con walked away (and not just over SD). Seeing Con go, I wonder > how many did leave without this splash. How many didn't even get involved at > all??? Did THAT have to happen? I don't blame you for it - the point is that > somewhere in the process a valuable kernel hacker went away. How and why? And > is it due to a deeper problem? Absolutely, the current Linux community hasn't realized how large the community has gotten and the internal processes for dealing with new developers, that aren't at companies like SuSE or RedHat, haven't been extended to deal with it yet. It comes off as elitism which it partially is. Nobody tries to facilitate or understand ideas in the larger community which locks folks like Con out that try to do provocative things outside of the normal technical development mindset. He was punished for doing so and is a huge failure in this community. Con basically got caught in a scheduler philosophical argument of whether to push a policy into userspace or to nice a process instead because of how crappy X is. This is an open argument on how to solve, but it should not have resulted in really one scheduler over the other. Both where capable but one is locked out now because of the choices of current high level kernel developers in Linux. There are a lot good kernel folks in many different communities that look at something like this and would be turned off to participating in Linux development. And I have a good record of doing rather interesting stuff in kernel. bill