this post was submitted on 23 Nov 2024
69 points (96.0% liked)

Linux

5418 readers
18 users here now

A community for everything relating to the linux operating system

Also check out [email protected]

Original icon base courtesy of [email protected] and The GIMP

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FizzyOrange -3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

Linus attacks code, not people.

If I say "your code is garbage" would you really say I'm not attacking you? I don't think most people would accept that. The CoC mentions being welcoming, inclusive, respectful, empathetic, not insulting or attacking people or being unprofessional. Linus violates all of those! Of the 10 bullet points there he violates 6 of them!!

IMO this is a big issue with CoCs. They give cowardly justification for arbitrary dictatorial actions. It's much better to admit that it's a dictatorship.

I agree with the rest of your comment - it's clearly worth putting up with his arseholery given how important to the project he is.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I do think there's a difference. It's an established communication rule: criticize the behavior, not the individual. But, I don't disagree that Linus is an abrasive personality, because he is.

[–] FizzyOrange 6 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Yes that is a good rule but the problem is he doesn't just respectfully criticise behaviour, he rudely attacks it. "This code doesn't meet the standards we require" is ok. "Your code is garbage. Again!" is absolutely not.

Imagine if you said that at work. That's a trip to HR anywhere I've worked.

[–] BatmanAoD 6 points 1 week ago

I agree, but if you look at the specific email linked, it very clearly crosses the line into direct abuse, whereas most of Linus's rants do exist in a slightly greyer area (even if they'd be grounds for a discussion with HR at an actual company).

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)