From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Message-ID: <51E5E609.1030202@oracle.com> Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 08:32:09 +0800 From: Jeff Liu MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sarah Sharp CC: Steven Rostedt , David Lang , ksummit-2013-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman , Darren Hart , Olivier Galibert , stable , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Willy Tarreau , Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML References: <20130715204135.GH15531@xanatos> <1373926109.17876.221.camel@gandalf.local.home> <20130715223615.GI15531@xanatos> <20130716211235.GG4994@xanatos> <20130716212704.GB9371@thunk.org> <20130716224357.GK4994@xanatos> <1374015299.6458.76.camel@gandalf.local.home> <20130716231217.GL4994@xanatos> In-Reply-To: <20130716231217.GL4994@xanatos> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 07/17/2013 07:12 AM, Sarah Sharp wrote: > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 06:54:59PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: >> On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 15:43 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: >> >>> Yes, that's true. Some kernel developers are better at moderating their >>> comments and tone towards individuals who are "sensitive". Others >>> simply don't give a shit. So we need to figure out how to meet >>> somewhere in the middle, in order to establish a baseline of civility. >> >> I have to ask this because I'm thick, and don't really understand, >> but ... >> >> What problem exactly are we trying to solve here? > > Personal attacks are not cool Steve. Some people simply don't care if a > verbal tirade is directed at them. Others do not want anyone to attack > them personally, but they're fine with people attacking their code. +1 I accept someone attaching my code, but it's better if he/she can point me out why the code is stupid. :) > > Bystanders that don't understand the kernel community structure are > discouraged from contributing because they don't want to be verbally > abused, and they really don't want to see either personal attacks or > intense belittling, demeaning comments about code. I feel the same way. > > In order to make our community better, we need to figure out where the > baseline of "good" behavior is. We need to define what behavior we want > from both maintainers and patch submitters. E.g. "No regressions" and > "don't break userspace" and "no personal attacks". That needs to be > written down somewhere, and it isn't. If it's documented somewhere, > point me to the file in Documentation. Hint: it's not there. Another thing might deviated from the main theme, but I'd like to raise it here because I would like to see what's the proper way for that. For instance, people A posted a patch set to the mailing list at first, people B think that there are some issues in A's implementation, and he happened to play around the same stuff recently, so he submitted another patch series. Finally, people B made it. (In that period, people A kept silent, maybe because he/she was unhappy) This is a actual occurrence I once observed from a subsystem list(my apologies, I just want to talk this case rather than against somebody), it seems people A is a new comer(because I can not searched any past commits of him/her from the git log), people B is definitely a senior guy. So that's my question, is that a proper collaboration form in kernel community? Does it better if people B could give some suggestions to help A to improve the code, especially if those help would help A stepping into the kernel development -- maybe it's depend largely on one's opinion. :( Thanks, -Jeff