Is the Linux Foundation trying to gag Linus Torvalds?

Linus Torvalds and the new code of conflict

Linus Torvalds has taken a lot of criticism for his…er…blunt responses to Linux developers over the years. But now the Linux Foundation has set up a “code of conflict” that might change the way Linus interacts with developers.

[ Also on ITworld:  ]

Julie Bort reports for Business Insider:

On Monday, the Linux Foundation kinda sorta slapped him on the wrist when they issued a new “Code of Conflict” policy that declared “personal insults or abuse are not welcome.”

It says that if “anyone feels personally abused, threatened, or otherwise uncomfortable” while working on Linux, they should report the situation to the Technical Advisory Board who will step in and mediate.

Torvalds was not the one to write this policy. His right-hand man, Greg Kroah-Hartman, wrote it and cutely submitted it as a “patch” to the Linux system. That meant that the ultimate keeper of Linux, Torvalds, had to see the “patch” and approve it, which he did, adding the public comment, “Let’s see how this works.”

More at Business Insider

Readers of the Business Insider article pulled no punches in sharing their thoughts about the Linux Foundation’s code of conflict :

JochenLiebig: “I agree with Linus. What’s all this US-drive PC…? What a stupid culture, where major newspaper…their pants over Charlie Hebdo cartoons. Where ‘friendliness’ is king, but people still die in poverty. Clear language rules, and efficient programming needs clear language. Let Linus do his thing! “

Nerdbert: “Funny, but hardware geeks are like this all the time. Sure, in some environments they’re PC, but in the ones that are more focused on getting out products there tend to be some very strong opinions. And you know, you actually grow a thick skin after you’ve had to vigorously defend your design decision from sharp attacks. And in general, you learn faster to actually think through possible objections and weak points in your argument BEFORE you waste too many other people’s time.

I think that’s what Linus is trying to do here: make sure folks have thought things through thoroughly before they propose a solution. He doesn’t go off on a short fuse, generally, but if you keep wasting his time without challenging his rejection of your argument and showing why it’s wrong, yeah, he’ll lose patience and let you know it. But he’ll also admit when he’s made a mistake or the wrong decision if you give him a good reason.

Really folks, this isn’t minor league stuff. If you cry, pout, and want to take your ball and go home when someone throws a high and tight fastball you shouldn’t be playing in the majors.”

Jerry Seinfeld: “I like how Jerry Seinfeld put it. If you resort to using profanity then you failed to nail the joke. It’s like that in every undertaking. If you resort using profanity then you’re retarded in some aspect. “

Junk Science: “You’ll notice that Linus never has truly and directly endorsed any politeness requirements.

The linux kernel is the big leagues. you don’t contribute on the kernel list unless you know your stuff, there is simply too much traffic and too many patches being submitted to bother dealing with idiots or emotional basket cases. there are plenty of projects which emphasize courtesy over other priorites…those don’t run nuclear warships, linux does.”

Dan Carpenter: “I was one of the people who Acked the document. It was written in private between Greg, Linus and the Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board. By the time I was asked to sign it, then it had already been approved by everyone and I was told that I couldn’t ask for changes.

Linus is not so bad as people make out. He’s never cursed at me, but he’s called me stupid a time or two. I’m not a new kernel developer or a child so I can handle it. Linus doesn’t bother with newbies, it is never personal and he doesn’t hold on to grudges.

In general kernel developers are decent people, but there are some losers. I’ve heard cases where people were just incredibly rude/foul/racist/sexist in private email to contributors and now we have somewhere to deal with that.

More at Business Insider

Jim Zemlin at Linux.com notes that the code of conflict could encourage what some consider to be a greater need for diversity in Linux development:

The Linux Foundation is happy to see these guidelines and is supportive of the mediation process. We will work directly with the Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board to provide whatever support they need in implementing this process. We believe the guidelines are grounded in the unique culture and process that makes Linux so successful. Conflict over code will and should happen. But the Code is very clear that personal insults or abuse are not welcome.

It’s no secret that the software industry would like to see more diversity. The Linux Foundation believes in that. While this code does not address that directly, we feel it’s an important step to make clear that civil discourse is an important part of an open source community and to make it very plain that all are welcome. Over the last few years, The Linux Foundation has undertaken a variety of programs to address the diversity issue. From funding kernel internships to being one of the first organizations to publish a code of conduct for our events, we take the need for diversity seriously and plan on continuing and expanding these programs as well as supporting the community in their efforts.

More at Linux.com

Some Linux.com readers posted their thoughts about the code of conflict and political correctness:

SNN: “Another sign of our politically correct thin skinned times…sigh. Linus is the reason we have much of what we have…he is honest and says what needs to be said. You get your feeling hurt ? Maybe the problem is you…?”

Hspcd: “I’ve seen a single interview of Linus and he seemed like an arrogant kind of guy, but that was only one interview. I think people should be professional and courteous. I do not like political correctness at all though and I think it has almost ruined corporate America.”

Linus: “Seriously, this anti-Linus campaign smells violently as a mean to reduce his control over the Linux project. I’ve seen people saying that Linus’ behaviour is not how you lead a successful project… What?? Linux is the most successfull collaborative software project that ever existed!! People should study how Linus is leading it, and COPY his behaviour!”

More at Linux.com

Korora 21 review

Korora 21 builds on the Fedora base to provide a more user-friendly desktop experience. DistroWatch recently did a full review of Korora and found that it offered real value to those who want a more full-featured desktop than Fedora 21 itself.

Jesse Smith reports for DistroWatch:

Approximately three months ago I experimented with Fedora 21, the distribution which serves as a base for Korora 21. I encountered a number of problems with Fedora, but my issues basically boiled down to three things: 1. Fedora is taking a minimal approach and the default Workstation branch of the project ships with very little software. 2. The Fedora software repositories are missing several popular packages, meaning users need to manually hunt down and enable third-party repositories. 3. The default software manager in Fedora was buggy and only displayed desktop applications.

Korora, in its attempt to be more user friendly and desktop ready, does a nice job of tackling the first two issues. Korora ships with a lot of software in the default installation. Some of the programs didn’t work for me, or didn’t work well, but most of the applications Korora provides out of the box are powerful and useful. I think Korora deserves credit for fleshing out the base distribution with a wide assortment of desktop applications, system administration tools and multimedia support. On a similar note, Korora enables several third-party software repositories by default. This gives us access to a wide array of additional software not available to Fedora users under the default configuration.

I admire the amount of work that has gone into Korora to transform Fedora into a more user friendly, desktop oriented distribution. Fedora, on its own, supplies a fairly bare (some might prefer the term sleek) Workstation product. Korora’s developers have done well as far as expanding Fedora’s core offering, adding many desired applications, codecs and providing alternative (if imperfect) graphical package managers.

All in all, I think Korora does provide a better desktop solution than its base. I think Korora is a step, nay two steps, in the right direction as far as being user friendly in concerned. There are still some rough patches to iron out and it is my hope that Korora 22 will manage to improve on package management and configuring systemd.

More at DistroWatch

Is Apple getting too much credit for the Apple Watch?

Apple’s recent event for its smartwatch got an enormous amount of media attention. An Android Wear user on Reddit thinks that Apple is getting too much credit for the Apple Watch, and feels that $10,000 is a bit much to pay for a watch. Other redditors shared their own thoughts about the pros and cons of Apple and Android Wear.

5tevie starts the thread with a mini-rant about Apple:

It bothers me to no end how Apple gets all the credit for something that Android has done for a year now. I’ve heard the Apple Watch being described as something “that’ll change the way we communicate.” I wish people would stop assuming an expensive name brand is always original and the best.

Also, the UI looks terrible, it looks awful for people with large fingers and that dial looks really inconvenient. Also, 10K for a gold piece of technology that will soon be outdated? end rant.

More at Android Wear on Reddit

Other redditors chimed in with their thoughts about Android Wear and Apple:

Cdegallo: “I’ll be completely honest–as someone who has a strong distaste for Apple, I’m quite disappointed at how slow android wear has developed. It doesn’t matter how early someone does something in a proof-of-principle way; if it’s not implemented in a good way, it’s meaningless. I’m not saying I could do better, or that the apple watch will either (we’ll have to wait to see), but AW has a lot to improve upon to be anything more than a notification siphon. That being said, I like my GWR for what it is.

Here’s the problem: the android wear platform feels like it was built by an engineer rather than a designer. All these spec’s, features, sensors, but half the time things go wrong. I exaggerate that it’s half the time, but you get the gist. Like all of android–especially the nexus line–it lacks the integration it would need to shine, and it’s a perfect place to demonstrate how well it can be done.

I agree, a 10k gold smartwatch is ridiculous. But apple has gotten a lot right with their hardware-OS integration on iphones–sadly it won’t take much to show how AW lacks in many places.”

DaGetz: “They’ll sell out of the 10k ones I guarantee you. People are stupid.

But honestly why do you give care? People can spend their money on their own choices even if they are stupid it’d not your place to correct them and its not a war. If you have an iPhone you can’t get AW so comparing these platforms is pretty dumb because nobody is going to pick their phone based on what watch they can get.

Apple’s watch looks awful to me. I’d never use it. I think they’ve completely missed the point of a wearable and gone full Galaxy gear with nicer hardware but it’s not designed for me or anyone on this sub. It’s designed for iPhone users. You wouldn’t catch me dead using an iPhone either but just because I hate it doesn’t mean it isn’t, or won’t be, very successful.”

Danielvdell: “I was watching my local news today and they kept going on and on about how amazing it was that you can answer calls on the Apple Watch and that it could check your heart rate. I think the Apple Watch is cool and all, but where was all this media hype when these features first came about a year ago? It’s just so irritating to me. I’m not one for the iOS vs. Android rivalry, but it really bothers me how Android Wear has received no attention and now Apple is getting all the credit for “inventing” what essentially every Android Wear device on the market can do.”

DaGetz: “Apple has designed siloed app experiences. If you want to check the score of the Giants game you will click the crown. Go to your app screen. Scroll over to ESPN sports or whatever click into it. Wait for it to load and then read the score. On AW google now will alert me when they score because I googled the game a week ago.

There are advantages to apple’s way if you want really well done apps on your wrist which is where your api comes in. Apple has given devs an easy to design for piece of hardware and Apple are going to let devs steer what device it ultimately becomes.

Googles approach is that a wearable needs to be very defined and limited because people don’t want to be navigating around a tiny screen. Google has the advantage that they are way way WAY ahead of everyone when it comes to contextually relevant alerts. Apple couldn’t do google now if it wanted to and google now is the android wear platform.

ColdApples: “What do you expect? The majority of consumers have no idea Android Wear even exists. If Google actually marketed existing smartwatches people wouldn’t been so excited about Apple’s ‘revolutionary’ addition to the market.”

More at Reddit

Did you miss a roundup? Check the Eye On Open home page to get caught up with the latest news about open source and Linux.