Hacker News Reader

Comment by TheCleric | Hacker News Reader

    So it's early Monday morning (well - early for me, I'm not really a morning person), and I'd love to have some good excuse for why I didn't do the 6.14 release yesterday on my regular Sunday afternoon release schedule.

    I'd like to say that some important last-minute thing came up and delayed things.

    But no. It's just pure incompetence.
    
    Because absolutely nothing last-minute happened yesterday, and I was just clearing up some unrelated things in order to be ready for the merge window. And in the process just entirely forgot to actually ever cut the release. D'oh.

Relatable

View on HN

> But no. It's just pure incompetence.

While I don't agree with how he conducts himself on the mailing lists; I respect he uses the same language when talking about himself.

You know, though, his conduct nowadays isn't really that bad; I don't think I'd be bothered by it in a workplace environment. He makes strong assertions, but not mean-spirited, and I think Linus has a lot of reasons to feel highly confident when he makes strong assertions when it comes to Linux.

Of course, there are some moments, but almost everybody has their moments. When push comes to shove, Linus seems to handle the important things pretty well.

> I don’t think I’d be bothered by it in a workplace environment

https://lkml.org/lkml/2025/2/23/351

This was a month ago. I wouldn’t stand for this in a company I worked for.

I read it and it seemed alright to me. A bit firm yes, but damn are there times when I wish people would have communicate with me with this level of honesty about how they're feeling regarding something. In some places, people have communicated with me with that level of honesty. It does require you to make sure you're not taking things personally when they're not meant to be, but it's a lot better than people trading subtle cues all the time, which seems to just lead to more explosive issues later on when things inevitably hit a breaking point.

Where do you really feel this message goes too far?

Maybe the part where he slanders Chuck Moore disciples?

>main problem has been people who have been forthing at the mouth

:-)

Right at the end

> So next time you want to write an email to complain about rust support: take a look in the mirror.

> Is the problem actually the rust code causing you issue, or is the problem between the keyboard and the chair, and you just want to vent?

So your problem with the email is that you don't like it when a leadership guy tells people to look at themselves before they cry.

Well, I'm glad you're not my lead. I want people to tell me when I'm doing something wrong. It's how I learn and grow.

Both can be true at once, right?

Some folks need more carrot, some need more stick. I don’t know the actors in this play, but I assume Linus (who presumably does have a mental map for these actors) is choosing to strike a tone which gets the message across without causing lasting damage.

Perhaps GP carries with them Linus’ priors resulting in a different reading of this specific message.

Good coaches and managers adjust their style to the person they're coaching.

I learned that from Bill Belichick. XD

what kind of person requires the style of cheating?

or sleeveless hoodies?

You can provide direct actionable feedback without being passive aggressive and insulting people.

Edit: https://lkml.org/lkml/2025/2/20/2066 here’s a really good example of Linus not taking any shit and doing so professionally

How would you rewrite that to communicate that idea?

Or would you just not communicate that idea? Why / Why not?

I think there’s any number of ways to reword that without using passive aggressive remarks and accusing other people of venting when you’ve been driven to venting in response. Something as simple as “keep your venting off the mailing lists in future” is short to the point and gets the same message across without resorting to personal insults.

Could certainly be less confrontational, but in this case, it doesn't really feel so unwarranted, in large part because coming from Linus regarding the Rust for Linux project, a stronger expression of frustration feels justifiable. It's a lot different than the real-life "toxic" communication I've witnessed, where the harshness is strictly one-sided and feels unjustifiable.

But I guess the line will be up to taste. I've been on the receiving end of harsher communication that I don't feel was completely uncalled for, too. I certainly can be a stubborn person and sometimes reasonable communication just isn't getting the message across. On the other hand, there are people who basically never do anything to warrant being communicated to like this. It would be ideal if everyone could communicate calmly and always get the message across, but frankly it just doesn't seem to work that way.

I disagree - the harshness here is personal insults and passive-aggressiveness. That's uncalled for and definitely "toxic".

It's very possible to be assertive and shut down unconstructive discussions, as Linus has repeatedly shown. Here [0] is a great example of Linus being firm, assertive, calling someone out on their shit.

[0] https://lkml.org/lkml/2025/2/20/2066

I really regret the proliferation of terms like "toxic" to describe things as benign as this. I think it's literally recoloring people's perception of what bad communication actually looks like.

You brought the word up, not me. The tiles are simple - avoid character attacks, and don’t be passive aggressive. Be direct and firm.

Otherwise people will go off topic and take whatever meaning they want (like I did with Linus’) comment and you did the same with the word toxic, which you introduced

I am okay with using it to describe things as "toxic" when they are, but there's a reason I still used scare quotes.

I agree with my sibling commentors, but I want to point out for people who do not go read the comment: this is not the off the walls Linus rant of the past.

This is a very even-handed response where Linus tells people to calm down, that the purpose of linux-next is to discover problems, and that Rust is not causing all of the problems.

At the very end there is a sentence or two that might be offensive, especially if you have a thin skin or aren't reflective about your own responses, but this is in no way akin to the bombs of the past.

I don’t think saying “he used to be worse” is a good defence. Has he gotten better? Yes. Is his email gone professional? No.

I think you’re wrong about the end, it’s an unnecessary personal attack that’s only purpose is to insult and/or to make Linus feel better. If you remove the last two or three paragraphs it’s a perfectly fine constructive response. With them, it’s a shitty, unnecessary escalation.

I don't think a "he used to be worse" defense is a takeaway from the above. The comment mentions the past to highlight it's not like previous rants people may assume it might be like to encourage giving it a read. Separate explanations were offered for why they believe the message was a reasonable response in its own light.

I agree the last 2-3 paragraphs could be better but I disagree that's the bar for what's professional, let alone what is reasonable to stand out out of a month's worth of emails. It's also hard to square that message being so horrible by nature of being shitty and just to make Linus feel better - to me, these are more pointed and more personally directed statements than the supposedly problematic discourse they're about (though still relatively mild overall).

We aren't all perfect in communication all the time, even the most ideal professionals. A large part of good discourse is accepting reasonable amounts of people being human and de-escalating smaller perceived slights naturally before declaring the conversation can't be stood for. Jumping at the latter can cause well meaning and well received folks to feel bullied, which is the exact opposite to the goal of trying to keep a professional air to discussion. Hell, some of the times I've been more colorfully told to look in the mirror were the best things which could have been said to me at the time (even if they might not be reasonable things to have heard at other times).

> We aren't all perfect in communication all the time, even the most ideal professionals. A large part of good discourse is accepting reasonable amounts of people being human and de-escalating smaller perceived slights naturally before declaring the conversation can't be stood for.

Do you not rink its fair to say that Linus has a track record of provoking that sort of behaviour?

I interpret the question as asking if I believe Linus has a track record of provoking escalating style behavior, if that's incorrect then ignore the following to re-ask and maybe I'll read it correctly the second time it's phrased :).

I'd disagree with that as his track record, though you won't find me claiming he is the perfect/ideal/flawless role model in that regard either. In my opinion, overall, he has reasonable and professional track record across the board these last few years (anything prior to that doesn't set the track record in my book). Especially if you read his emails regularly, not just the most popular ones about the most charged discussions he's asked to enter into. If you'd asked me the same question 10 years ago I'd've given a very different answer.

> Do you not rink its fair to say that Linus has a track record of provoking that sort of behaviour?

It's true that reporting on Linus' emails has a track record of only highlighting the rudest ones, creating this impression in your mind. Anything else is speculation.

> Do you not rink its fair to say that Linus has a track record of provoking that sort of behaviour?

Your point about Linus's behaviour are correct in some sense: other people would make the same point less aggressively. But you aren't making any attempt to balance the scales.

There isn't some other version of Linus lying on the shelf that has the technical decision making record he does, and is also a great diplomat. So the choices are: keep the flawed but highly talented man we have, or discard Linus for someone else who almost certainly will be worse technically, but may be a better wordsmith.

I'd wager most of the people here have jobs that depend on Linus's technical skills. That's certainly true of most people whose day jobs are working on the kernel. They've made their choice, and it's the obvious one. They'll take the man that abuses them for their mistakes over a silver tongued Mr average.

If you don't like that, go and work on your own kernel for Mr average. But if you take that route, be prepared for the fact that no one is going to want to use your kernel because, well, it's average.

Linus is perfectly capable of making the same point less aggressively, he's done so on the same topic [0].

> So the choices are: keep the flawed but highly talented man we have, or discard Linus for someone else who almost certainly will be worse technically, but may be a better wordsmith.

I don't think that's true. There's always other options.

[0] https://lkml.org/lkml/2025/2/20/2066

Yes, it is unnecessary, but then again, a lot of things I say are unnecessary, too, so I ought to look in the mirror.

> Is his email gone professional? No.

Is it worth making absolutist assertions about such a relative topic? Offence is taken as much as it's given, and everyone has a different thickness of skin in these matters.

What's your problem with this email? I would expect this kind of constructive criticism from any team lead with a functioning brain and without a yes-man attitude.

That was a very calm and well-written e-mail, and an impressively mature way to decisively take a position on a technical issue that's controversial within the team. The only note I have is that adding "or is the problem between the keyboard and the chair, and you just want to vent" at the end was unnecessary, but it's not necessarily even wrong.

In context, that is a great reply. Out of context it seems ok.

For someone in the games industry, you have an exceptionally thin skin and must have not been in many high stakes crises if the last two sentences bother you so much.

I don’t see how you can take away that they bother me so much and I must have a thin skin. If I saw them in a work email I’d ignore them and move on. If one of my direct reports sent that to a coworker I’d take them to the side and remind them to not be a dick .

It’s perfectly possible to be firm and direct without insulting people.

What? There was literally nothing wrong with that message - including the final sentence. He's calling for everyone to self-reflect and have humility - only someone profoundly lacking in it could be bothered by a message like this

Is he? or is he venting at someone while accusing them of doing the same thing back.

If instead of "Is the problem actually the rust code causing you issue, or is the problem between the keyboard and the chair, and you just want to vent?"

he said "Is the problem actually the rust code causing you issue, or do you just want to vent?" it's perfectly acceptable. The snide insults are petty, unprofessional, and unnecessary.

> only someone profoundly lacking in it could be bothered by a message like this

I could just as easily say that anyone who doesn't see that should look in a mirror and see if the see an ass staring back at them, but I wouldn't. When I read this, I see someone blowing off steam and knowing they can get away with it. I respect linus, and as I've said elsewhere he's perfectly capable of handling himself without resorting to passive aggressive insults.

Of course it could have been written more diplomatically. Yet, many people clearly don't find it to be offensive/inappropriate - especially when viewed in the context of the entire post, which was very well written and diplomatic.

Moreover, I can very much see how those precise words could be said verbally, in person, in a completely disarming, effective manner - by using particular pacing, tone, gestures, a wink, etc. Whether Linus would do that is another matter - but your comment was talking about how it would be inappropriate anywhere.

completely 100% disagree with this.

Businesses are better and more efficient places with blunt honesty.

Seriously? That criticism is more polite than some of my praises.

The guys is truly a beacon of fairness. Linux as a kernel will probably go downhill after we lose Linus.

And I'm only 50% ironic/joking.

Yeah, GKH doesn't have the insult power of Linus. Can some Finnish people teach GKH on how to insult? I learned the word perkeleen vittupää from LKML.

That’s usually how people like that are. They hold others to high standards because they hold themselves to high standards.

Does he willingly take that treatment from others? I don't really know, but that would be the actual test of congruence.

I am not deep into the Linus weeds but my impression is that he doesn't especially care if he's on the receiving end of this. It only started to feel different from "well, the Linux list is the PvP zone" when Linus was sufficiently weighty/famous that you almost had to take an insult from him to heart, and he did eventually correct his behavior there.

I'm also not that of a fan to know that many details, but I'd place my bets in that he actually doesn't care if people speak to him the same way, as long as they have solid arguments. I think Linus is overall one of the goods influences in this strange IT period.

I don't follow the lkml enough to highlight a pattern, but this recent exchange comes to mind:

On Thu, Jul 4, 2024 at 8:52 PM Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

> Jason. This smells. It's BS.

On Thu, 4 Jul 2024 at 11:57, Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com> wrote:

> It's not BS. And that's not a real argument from you, but rather is something else.

On Thu, 4 Jul 2024 at 12:19, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

> Bah. I guess I'll have to walk through the patch series once again.

> I'm still not thrilled about it. But I'll give it another go.

> Linus

https://lkml.org/lkml/2024/7/4/1208

He named both git and Linux after himself.

One does not get a pass on being rude and hurtful to others by speaking about themselves negatively.

The fundamental thing that people never seem to understand in the "Linus is being an asshole" vs "I love Linus, he tells it like he is and to manage a project you have to be willing to do that!" debate is that it is completely unnecessary to speak at all about someone's person on a mailing list like lkml.

"This code sucks!" - no. "This code does not meet the linux kernel's coding conventions, has race conditions, and this algorithm could likely be implemented in a far more performant way."

"You're just WRONG" - no. "The position that you're being forced to learn a new programming language is not correct. You have not been asked to write or even understand Rust."

I think the people who think 'you have to be that way to manage/lead' have never been under a good manager or leader and I daresay that a lot of people in technical supervisory and management positions unfortunately grew up respecting Linus and thinking his behavior was how you "get things done", not realizing that Linus's behavior almost certainly kept a lot of people from risking contributing and if anything has hurt the Linux kernel project - and kept people from feeling they could safely point out problems in someone's code because

T'so is a great example; a huge ego. As a result, people simply have gone elsewhere to work on filesystems. The ext filesystem(s) were not terribly reliable or tolerant of real-world situations, is still not very performant, and has evolved at a glacial pace consistently lagging behind its peers.

As I cross 40 years in this industry, I find that my procrastination often has subtle root causes. I assume others have the same experience.

Currently, I've been putting off a long report for a few days and it's because I'm trying to balance a number of conclusions, tones, etc. When I'm ready, I'm ready.

For myself, I think it's just as much how to word things properly to most effectively get your point across, as it is to be ready if your report has some kind of backlash or isn't seen the way you meant it. You need to be mentally prepared to handle the response you get back, even if it's no response at all after you spent many hours putting a report together and worrying about how to make it just right. Obviously this will change depending on how important what you're reporting on is, and whether your work contributed to that report's findings.

I find that can be true - but I also sometimes just forget to hit submit.

The article helpfully informs us this note was written by the man himself, Linux Torvalds.

Nice did not notice that. Good catch.

He really has grown as a person. Ten years ago, there would have been no mention of it unless someone called it out, and the response to that would have boiled down to "f#ck off, it's free".

... Which also would have been relatable, and valid if we're being honest.

"f#ck off, it's free" is possibly an acceptable response if you're also working for free. If maintaining that free software is your job that you are getting paid good money to do, you really should hold yourself to higher standards.

Hm, depends on who is paying you, I think. If some philanthropist is paying you to make good free software, yes. But if you’re paid by stakeholders that want your maintenance to make sure they can use the free software themselves, you’re only really accountable to their opinions.

It is really closer to the latter (Linux Foundation = the megacorporations LUG), but Linus seems to treat it as the former - in a good way.

I assume he takes advice/feedback i.e. the famous ESR post and the concerns from that contributor from intel and others to heart. Or at least has forced himself to learn how to do so.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com