Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review

Darren Hart
2013-07-16T15:27:47Z

On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 08:09 -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 04:30:45PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:41 PM, Sarah Sharp
> > <sarah.a.sharp@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > I should not have to ask for professional behavior on the mailing lists.
> > > Professional behavior should be the default.
> >
> > So, what does "professional" mean? A professional is paid for his work, an
> > amateur isn't. But this doesn't say anything about code quality, maintainer
> > responsiveness, etc.
> > Does it imply behavior that (hopefully) keeps getting you paid?
>
> I think we're getting hung up on this specific phrase. I've interpreted
> this issue with lkml communication as a need to avoid bullying. I think
> "no bullying", while still up for heavy interpretation, is better to
> focus on than "being professional".
>

Agreed. The swearing will continue until code quality improves.

The bit I can get behind is the avoidance of personal attacks. Some on
this thread have argued that instances of such attacks are now few and
far between. Is that the case? How many are we talking about? 10/day?
10/year? Is it truly only the lieutenants getting public lashings?

I understand that it is the environment itself, the accepted norms, the
"standard you walk past" (as Sarah has quoted) that is the real focus.
So yes, let's not get hung up on professional/unprofessional or any
other such subjective term or fall into the PC traps.

--
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
Yocto Project - Linux Kernel