From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2013 07:12:14 +0200 From: Willy Tarreau To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Guenter Roeck , Sarah Sharp , Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Dave Jones , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Andrew Morton , stable , Darren Hart , ksummit-2013-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) Message-ID: <20130716051214.GC12242@1wt.eu> References: <20130715184642.GE15531@xanatos> <20130715195316.GF15531@xanatos> <20130715204135.GH15531@xanatos> <1373926109.17876.221.camel@gandalf.local.home> <20130715223615.GI15531@xanatos> <20130715231555.GA24650@roeck-us.net> <1373933850.17876.224.camel@gandalf.local.home> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1373933850.17876.224.camel@gandalf.local.home> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 08:17:30PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Mon, 2013-07-15 at 16:15 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > > > One thing you should keep in mind in your discussion is what can happen > > if people get too polite with each other. > > > > I have seen this happen at two large companies I worked for. Early on, flames > > are acceptable and expected as response to someone publishing bad code which > > breaks everything for everyone. Then, at some point, it is not acceptable > > anymore to flame, and one is expected to be polite and friendly at all times. > > "Your code breaks the build for every platform. Would you please kindly > > consider fixing it ?" > > Result is that code quality suffers, to the point where images don't even > > build anymore. > > > > I hope the Linux kernel never gets into that stage. To avoid that, > > I am willing to be cursed at by Linus if I am the responsible party. > > Didn't Jim Zemlin show some research where there were two groups: > > One that did a bunch of brain storming where no idea was a bad idea > > The other required you to defend your idea while the others bashed it. > > The results always showed that the second group not only did a better > job, but also faster and more efficient. > > I'm afraid if we worry too much about politeness, we will fall into that > first group. Linus already said you don't need to feer this change from him :-) Willy