Nah it’s completely fine. I vastly prefer an angry-sounding takedown over a passive aggressive takedown and a takedown Mauro definitely deserved because his code was, in fact, utter shite, and that as a maintainer. This isn’t “oh he’s a noob he doesn’t know how the kernel works” type of territory. Also note that this happened after he had been told what’s up in a neutral and factual way: Linus, even in his most management by perkele days, never made those things the first reply to anything. So Mauro got his chance to spot that he fucked up and correct his approach, he didn’t, therefore, it has to be said loudly. Simple as that.
Also, no “you should be aborted retroactively” in sight anywhere. Yeah that stuff wasn’t necessary even though everyone with an ounce of social intelligence should readily spot that those insults were always so over the top as to be obviously humorous.
It’s possible to be assertive and assign responsibility for a screwup without being a dick. “Being a dick” is the nothing else has worked option, not step one.
“being a dick” and “assertive” are weasel terms which do a hell a lot of lifting in your argument there. I have no idea where your line for behaviour to be deemed acceptable actually is.
IMO, no, Linus wasn’t a dick. He called out a specific attitude and behaviour which Mauro is not supposed to show in his role as maintainer. What about Mauro being a dick because he went in all self-righteous like “this is a bug in pulseaudio”?
If you were a restaurant manager, and a server told a customer that he’s not going to serve beer with steak but only wine because “drinking beer with steak is obviously wrong”, what would you do? Chew them out, of course. It’s way out of line. This isn’t Linus exploding over nothing just to bully someone, that’s a thing he has never done.
If you want someone toxic to complain about in the FOSS space pick Lennart Poettering, the kind of guy who replies to “We’d like to be able to disable various features to keep things small” with “why do you hate disabled people they need accessibility”. More generally speaking: Focussing on tone never ends up well. You can be incredibly toxic in the most flowery of idioms.
Your example is from one of this industries notorious for being toxic – that doesn’t make it right.
“Why would you think that’s even remotely acceptable? Now I have to go apologize and possible comp a meal.” Depending on the circumstance: take them off that table, send them home, or fire them. Being in control of themselves is one of the defining aspects of leadership, and being abusive is the sign a “leader” that isn’t.
If they start being a dick: sure, game on – so long as you’re not demeaning yourself doing it. But most people are capable of a degree of self reflection and accountability once you make the situation clear to them, and they deserve that chance. Sometimes people don’t even realize they’re the ones that screwed up, even when it’s obvious to everyone else.
There’s it again. What, precisely, is it that makes Linus’ comment “abusive”? Is he gaslighting? Is he attacking Mauro over what he is? All I see is calling out, harshly, what Mauro did, behaviour that actually occurred and that is not acceptable and that Mauro knows is not acceptable. “We do not break userspace” is the rule #1 of Linux development, Mauro ignored it and was a dick about it.
Or do you disagree with the tone of the whole thing. Things like “Shut up” instead of “This is not up for discussion”. If so, then please for the love of the gods please shut up.
Maybe fair in a typical setting, but getting iffy around programmers, especially kernel maintainers. I’m convinced linux and foss in general would not exist without the autism spectrum, and who knows maybe even borderline personality disorders
Nah it’s completely fine. I vastly prefer an angry-sounding takedown over a passive aggressive takedown and a takedown Mauro definitely deserved because his code was, in fact, utter shite, and that as a maintainer. This isn’t “oh he’s a noob he doesn’t know how the kernel works” type of territory. Also note that this happened after he had been told what’s up in a neutral and factual way: Linus, even in his most management by perkele days, never made those things the first reply to anything. So Mauro got his chance to spot that he fucked up and correct his approach, he didn’t, therefore, it has to be said loudly. Simple as that.
Also, no “you should be aborted retroactively” in sight anywhere. Yeah that stuff wasn’t necessary even though everyone with an ounce of social intelligence should readily spot that those insults were always so over the top as to be obviously humorous.
It’s possible to be assertive and assign responsibility for a screwup without being a dick. “Being a dick” is the nothing else has worked option, not step one.
“being a dick” and “assertive” are weasel terms which do a hell a lot of lifting in your argument there. I have no idea where your line for behaviour to be deemed acceptable actually is.
IMO, no, Linus wasn’t a dick. He called out a specific attitude and behaviour which Mauro is not supposed to show in his role as maintainer. What about Mauro being a dick because he went in all self-righteous like “this is a bug in pulseaudio”?
If you were a restaurant manager, and a server told a customer that he’s not going to serve beer with steak but only wine because “drinking beer with steak is obviously wrong”, what would you do? Chew them out, of course. It’s way out of line. This isn’t Linus exploding over nothing just to bully someone, that’s a thing he has never done.
If you want someone toxic to complain about in the FOSS space pick Lennart Poettering, the kind of guy who replies to “We’d like to be able to disable various features to keep things small” with “why do you hate disabled people they need accessibility”. More generally speaking: Focussing on tone never ends up well. You can be incredibly toxic in the most flowery of idioms.
Your example is from one of this industries notorious for being toxic – that doesn’t make it right.
“Why would you think that’s even remotely acceptable? Now I have to go apologize and possible comp a meal.” Depending on the circumstance: take them off that table, send them home, or fire them. Being in control of themselves is one of the defining aspects of leadership, and being abusive is the sign a “leader” that isn’t.
If they start being a dick: sure, game on – so long as you’re not demeaning yourself doing it. But most people are capable of a degree of self reflection and accountability once you make the situation clear to them, and they deserve that chance. Sometimes people don’t even realize they’re the ones that screwed up, even when it’s obvious to everyone else.
There’s it again. What, precisely, is it that makes Linus’ comment “abusive”? Is he gaslighting? Is he attacking Mauro over what he is? All I see is calling out, harshly, what Mauro did, behaviour that actually occurred and that is not acceptable and that Mauro knows is not acceptable. “We do not break userspace” is the rule #1 of Linux development, Mauro ignored it and was a dick about it.
Or do you disagree with the tone of the whole thing. Things like “Shut up” instead of “This is not up for discussion”. If so, then please for the love of the gods please shut up.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
“You’re not wrong, [Linus], you’re just [being] an asshole”
Maybe fair in a typical setting, but getting iffy around programmers, especially kernel maintainers. I’m convinced linux and foss in general would not exist without the autism spectrum, and who knows maybe even borderline personality disorders
deleted by creator