Linux devs ponder pulling contributions over new Code of Conduct | Hacker News Reader

Linux devs ponder pulling contributions over new Code of Conduct

itnews.com.au

20 pointsjunkyarddog17 comments

Stallman claims that once code is licensed under the GPL, it can't be revoked:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18081199

Which kind of makes sense, since anyone who currently has a valid license to use the code (anyone running Linux) has all the source and can legally redistribute or modify it, based on the terms of their current license.

Where would it be stored these days to be publicly accessible? Microsoft owns GitHub and I bet it made Torvalds unhappy.

I don't follow - what does Github and its ownership have to do with anything? I could be wrong, but I was under the impression Linus mirrors on Github just for convience's sake.

I do know that Linus's Github repo is not the official public repository for the kernel -- that's kernel.org's job. And FWIW, relations between the Linux and MS kernel devs have (to my understanding) never been better, especially since the Spectre/Meltdown reveals.

GPL2 vs GPL3

“The question not to get hung up on is what any individual's choice in this matter says about their attitude towards, say, historically underrepresented minorities. It is perfectly cononsistent to be pro-tolerance and pro-inclusion while believing this subculture ought to be all about producing good code without regard to who is offended by the process.”

I don't follow the logic. A hostile environment would negatively impact the long-term sustainability and quality of the project... alienating people who would be want to and are able to contribute... it's an odd trade just to appease those who would threaten the project because they demand the ability to offend or ostracize people.

A quick gaze beyond the rhetoric looks like a silly sense of entitlement.

If you read into it, the new Code of Conduct actually may actually do more to ostracize people.

Notable contributors have already been harassed on Twitter and other platforms because apparently their actions outside of the Linux Kernel and LKML deem them breaking it, and people love to attack people for breaking rules.

There was also no-one really asking for a new Code of Conduct, and things weren't really broken. People are mostly just worried that its going to cause more issues and tension than when we had the lack of a proper CoC, or cause them to get targeted.

The Code of Conduct also has a few questionable statements, such as not judging people based on their technical abilities, which is a super important thing when you're actually developing one of the world's largest operating systems and people like to contribute garbage.

It was also, as the Author themselves has stated it was only made as a political statement, and the entire idea of it is to push an agenda. (^ See their twitter for where they said this)

Sometimes hostility and arguments really drive some people to do better at times also; and it makes people think about their code quality and double check it before they actually submit their patches -- you don't want to be slated by Linus if you submit rubbish do you?

> The Code of Conduct also has a few questionable statements, such as not judging people based on their technical abilities, which is a super important thing when you're actually developing one of the world's largest operating systems and people like to contribute garbage.

Where exactly does the CoC state this?

"In the interest of fostering an open and welcoming environment, we as contributors and maintainers pledge to making participation in our project and our community a harassment-free experience for everyone, regardless of [...] level of experience"

You seem to be literally saying that harassment is necessary when developing operating systems. Is that your intention?

The Code of Conduct also has a few questionable statements, such as not judging people based on their technical abilities,

Have you actually read the CoC? Because I just did, and I couldn't find that line.

Don't harras the noobs is hardly the same as don't judge a contributor on the technical meritas of their work.

Code is like science. You don't ignore somebody's contribution just because you don't agree with their values. If it's good it's good. Doesn't matter who birthed it.

For some values of 'good'? That's the whole issue.

Wait, so someone's code can be bad because he is a bad person? Even though if you didn't know he is a bad person his code would be just as good as written by good person?

No what makes code good or bad? That's a value judgement; different from my values can be part of the evaluation

Sure, it's a value judgement. But it's value judgement about the code not the author. It's just like science. We can't say: let's skip the whole rocket thing because it was invented by a commie and a nazi.

Also value judgement doesn't mean totally arbitrary judgement. If code doesn't work it's not good, if it's not maintainable, it's not good. There are qualities of good code that programmers tend to agree about. Being written by wonderful human being, is not one of those qualities.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com