Recent searches
Search options
Right or wrong, the feeling I got was that the bar for actions was just raised higher. Now it's not just the CoC committee, you also need a near unanimous vote from the TAB.
@jani @corbet @ljs @brauner I'm a bit disillusioned at the whole CoC thing - in practice, there are zero repercussions from being a jerk. Banning people from being archived/listed by lore does not prevent them from doing their work, people equating those two things are kidding themselves. Developers getting CC'ed directly generally have no idea the person is banned, and any reply will presumably be archived/listed anyway.
@axboe @jani @corbet @brauner well you might get asked to apologise (no consequences if you refuse)? And get implicit permission to turn up to LF events you're not invited to and abuse people?
Then wait a month to treat the RC process like the merge window again or something?
That's sort of a repercussion right? 
It's all a joke. Kent was the test. Failed.
@axboe @jani @corbet @brauner Yeah it's only _certain_ kinds of people who will be encouraged.
What infuriated me most about that whole thing was that Kent got to dictate the narrative.
Reality was his broken mm patch was nacked, he threw a temper tantrum and abused the kernel process to take the patch through his tree (outrageous, banning offence stuff imo), and then when it was fixed he got abusive.
His 5,000 word bullshit on patreon + on-list warbling is what people took as the narrative.
@ljs @jani @corbet @brauner Well, as far as I can tell, he might be doing that exact same thing again. His -next branch:
https://evilpiepirate.org/git/bcachefs.git/log/?h=for-next
has a block patch that he sent out to linux-block, got effectively nak'ed as being broken by multiple people, ignored, and then sent out as part of a larger bcachefs patchset and is now staged in the above branch?
@ljs @jani @corbet @brauner “We had a situation where the process clearly broke down in -block [...]”
I’m just going to fully ignore this person going forward. They are either deliberately fabricating their own truth, or they truly have no idea how the process works yet plows forward as it must be everybody else that’s wrong. Unbelievable.
@axboe @jani @corbet @brauner can't blame you at all.
He did the same with the mm stuff more-or-less, reframed it as a debate about a GFP flag rather than him intentionally committing what to me is a 'get kicked out of the kernel forever' offence of intentionally working around the process.
The guy needs to go from the kernel, full stop, end of discussion.
I gather there was some consensus reached at lsf that no patches will be taken from him outside of bcachefs?
Which is you know, sane
@axboe @jani @corbet @brauner sigh yeah, and then you see how Linus talks to @rostedt - why is he talking to a massively good force in the kernel that way, but tolerating a toxic black hole?
Really it's a Linus problem at the end of the day.
And at some point, Kent is going to do something so beyond the pale that even Linus will have to accept his booting.
Question is how long we let him carry on doing damage until then...
All for a shitty broken file system?...
@oleksandr @axboe @jani @corbet @brauner @rostedt well, I base this comment on the beautiful contrary claims of:
1. It is the best thing since sliced bread, more stable than btrfs, better testing than sqlite and the rest of the kernel put together.
2. (after fundamental things break and _development_ is done during rc's) it's an experimental filesystem what do you expect??
I am sure the idea is decent enough, an arrogant implementer ruins all.