Linus Torvalds flames Google kernel contributor over filesystem suggestion
lkml.iu.edu
lkml.iu.edu
I know nothing about what they're talking, but the response appears reasonable and mature, seems to engage in the substantive issues without responding to the anger/flaming, and looks like it intends to de-escalate and move forward. Torvalds' reply to that is more measured <https://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/2401.3/04260.html>.
There's a step back in tone a few replies later, but if you go through the next dozen or two messages over the next couple of days, it seems like things go a totally different path than might be expected from the linked submission.
Anyway, I thought it was worth a perusal. Good example of how to respond to something like that.
I wouldn't say saying "If I knew ... was going to piss you off so much, I wouldn't have done that." is very mature.
Seems like people in this group have pretty much gotten used to him being a condescending ass every dozen messages, filter out the posturing, take his genuine suggestion, and work from there.
It doesn't seem to bother them (or they are expending emotional energy not responding to it, a likely bit of collateral damage, but they are still communicating in a pretty professional way besides his tantrums).
And in this case, where the person has deliberately, repeatedly, tried to use code they don't understand, it makes it clear that they need to either learn enough to be sensible on the topic, or go away and not come back.
It's very efficient and to the point.
Linus has such a clarity of thought that if I disagree with him I have to examine why. Anything else is hubris imo, his track record speaks for itself.
Perfect example is his infamous rant on why C++ wasn't used for git. He's a kernel developer, of course that's his opinion. I still love C++ but I'm certainly not offended by it.
Someone asked him why he didn't choose C++ for it and he went on a rant basically saying C++ was bad, people that use it are subpar programmers, and that one of the advantages of choosing C is to weed out people who think C++ would have been a good choice.
oddly enough I can't seem to find the original rant, if someone can provide that I'd be greatful.
edit:
to give context to my original post, Linus is a kernel developer, he's going to value things that the vast majority of developers don't because he's dealing with problems that the vast majority of developers don't.
As a C++ programmer, my cope for this is that back then's C++ was today's C#. It was the even-higher-level, comfier, shortcut language, loved by noobs and normies who aren't true hardcore nerds (identified by the masochism of choosing to write C) and write code that makes you cringe. (Although the situation is better today since C# excludes classes of errors C++ doesn't, so it actually IS friendlier than C while C++ merely gives you the illusion that it is. :p That it's often used as a beginner language blows my mind given how complicated it is once you get to learning it.)
Today, I think C++ has been bled off of those people (who have since fled to higher levels of abstraction while only hardcore nerds harbor the masochism to have stuck to C++), and modern C++ has made the language so much more powerful, that it would be worthy of being in the kernel. That said, we have Rust, which is an even better replacement for C.
https://github.com/shawnanastasio/BasilC/issues/9
> C++ is a horrible language. It's made more horrible by the fact that a lot of substandard programmers use it, to the point where it's much much easier to generate total and utter crap with it. Quite frankly, even if the choice of C were to do nothing but keep the C++ programmers out, that in itself would be a huge reason to use C.
> In other words: the choice of C is the only sane choice. I know Miles Bader jokingly said "to piss you off", but it's actually true. I've come to the conclusion that any programmer that would prefer the project to be in C++ over C is likely a programmer that I really would prefer to piss off, so that he doesn't come and screw up any project I'm involved with.
Here's another article that's quoting from it as well.
https://fossbytes.com/linux-creator-linus-torvalds-c-program...
I don't doubt he's ranted about it in other places but the rant I remember is definitely the git one :)
Thats funny as hell. I love Linus.
Im pretty sure that was a little tongue in cheek. Thats hilarious though.
Don't cry. The contributor will be fine. If you get flamed by Linus you've already earned a badge of a high profile developer. And even best of us sometimes do something stupid and a little direct cold shower is not going to hurt anyone. Linus is not bulling people, doesn't target them for no reason, doesn't do sneaky politics to undermine people, etc.
That message wasn't just for Steven, but for everyone else who contributes to this critical piece of software we rely on. It's usually very easy for standards to slip, so it requires constant resistance in the opposite direction
News from a few days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39172487
>You copied that function without understanding why it does what it does, and as a result your code IS GARBAGE. AGAIN.
I generally believe in positivity but if I saw this as his direct report I'd move him to another project ASAP to get scrutiny on his code quality.
I'm not sure I'd start there, but I'd definitely want to understand what problem the person was trying so solve. Might be legit, might be OKR-driven development.
https://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/2401.3/04995.html
I did.
I would never, ever contribute upstream to Linux so long as Linus is involved. My time is too valuable to deal with his BS.
He should realize the hostile environment he creates drives away contributors.
And with my other comments being downvoted, it’s incredible that people are so up his arse that they live in a bubble thinking that it’s ok to belittle someone like that.
Imagine working under someone like that… wow.
Did we read the same email? He only commented about how bad the code is; he said nothing about the person who wrote it.
Sometimes we want more control and can't get it. Frustrating. Sometimes senior people are sick and tired of control and want less. Frustrating!
This is what narcissist enablers say: that some people are more equal than others.
taking things personally doesn't stop the narcissists, it only enables them and others to hurt you. so how can not taking something personally enable narcissists?
for your own mental sanity, you should try to not take anything personally. put it down to that person being an asshole, or someone who lacks the mental capacity to be nice, or whatever putdown you can think of.
not taking something personally does not mean you condone that behavior. you can reject a behavior even if it is not aimed at you.
if you take things personally it only hurts your own ego, and if that happens to much, it may lead to self-doubt, or even depression. it's not worth it.