Originally posted by logical
View Post
Bcachefs Changes Rejected Reportedly Due To CoC, Kernel Future "Uncertain"
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by fotomar View PostYou accused me of “hate” without evidence. In some countries you would be guilty of libel
what is it I’m supposed to “get,” again?
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by logical View Post
I did not accuse anyone of hating, I merely commented on literal admissions of hate by others, including yours (e.g. "There is nothing wrong with hating the odious")
I said there is nothing wrong with hating something that should be hated, genocide as an example
I did not say I hated anything
so you are either a liar, or lack reading comprehension, which is it?Last edited by fotomar; 22 November 2024, 09:17 PM.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by gotar View PostSorry, but for "personal computers" you could as well use FAT16 and see no problems for years.
Originally posted by gotar View PostPeople doing stupid things are your argument, or weakly performing CoW fs (btrfs)?
COW performs poorly. More precisely, enterprise users do not care at all about Phoronix benchmarks that claim to show how well a COW filesystem can theoretically perform in the right conditions. Only enthusiasts care about that. What enterprise users actually care about is how poorly a filesystem can perform under the worst-case conditions and COW filesystems thus far can perform extremely poorly. Worse COW filesystems can take an inordinately long time to reach steady-state which means they are extremely difficult to measure ahead of time. With the ZFS problem I mentioned earlier we actually tested with our real workload for an entire month before migrating our storage servers over to it. But 2.5 to 3 months later all of those servers fell off a cliff almost simultaneously.
Originally posted by gotar View PostFirst of all - you shouldn't put VM images on any filesystem at all, there's some (usually other) inside already. Databases (and I'm not talking about data-bags like MySQL) have their own safety features and expect admin to understand the stack. E.g. PostgreSQL WAL-s are a kind of journaling and you can mount ext4 with data=writeback.
You can say that, but if you're using one of these filesystems for your multiple disk and or logical volume layers (i.e., Zvols on ZFS) then your VM images are on a filesystem whether you realize it or not. It doesn't matter if you use flat files over NFS or Zvols over iSCSI. That's just the nature of the beast.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by TheMightyBuzzard View PostI love people who jump into "Free as in speech" projects and immediately try to put their boots on the neck of speech.
Maybe you should just try to not be a biggot when you work on international projects and try to keep your petty us racism an politics out
of it.
Comment
-
-
IT'S OFFICIAL
BcacheFS has been banned for the 6.13 cycle. That will teach him manners for not apologizing for answering in kind to an insult! Even most countrie's criminal law recognizes that using force against an attacker is not a crime, but in CoC kernel land it's verboten.
Only ones that suffer are people that uses bcachefs. And possibly the pace of development and employment opportunities in open osurce if this cuckery scares away potential funding for additional developers. Kent has crowdsourced funding.Last edited by varikonniemi; 23 November 2024, 08:41 AM.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by clipcarl View Post
I personally think that CoCs can and sometimes do provide a valuable tool that can contributes to the success of a software project. It is a well known and largely accepted fact that the behavior of certain individuals can be so off-putting that it causes others to not contribute.
But you could also make the argument that the rules, implementation and enforcement of certain CoCs, such as in the case of the Linux kernel's CoC here, isn't as fair as it could be. If you did I wouldn't disagree with you.
But the issue here isn't whether Kent or anyone else agrees with the CoC rules, it's Kent's seeming inability to follow any except those he wants to.
To paraphrase someone wittier than I: We're trying to run a civilization here.
But, that doesn't seem to be what the CoC is being used for - it's to push agenda(s) especially woke/political agendas and forcing ppl who have differing (political opinions and ideas) to adhere to whatever the ones who run the CoC want and subscribe to. I read that KO made some comments that weren't always about code - and part of this is about some things he said. Sure, he also had an outburst and told one guy 'to get the head of his ass' or something along those lines - to 'fucking wake up' or whatever. Sure, that behavior is a bit extreme and uncalled for - but, I don't think it's worst thing ever said. I think even LT has said some outlandish things and insulted other coders? The problem is these CoC ppl and others have concentrated too much on KO's behavior and the 'apology' I think is not just about his individual comments to that one guy. I believe they don't like what other things he's said and believes - I bet they are well aware of his behavior and character and think if they provoke him enough - he'll say things in which they can pursue ousting him altogether. It seems in the IT world - if you don't conform and adhere to the same politics, they try to cancel you or are so strict on your work - that they fault you for anything - the other thing regarding this is they want rigid rules and not everyone is good at following them - which this guy supposedly isn't. So, if they don't like his politics - they can probably 'squeeze these rules' even more - find where he's vulnerable and then get rid of him.
I can't see why else you would be so obsessed about him apologizing - they want him to grovel publicly - it appears to me.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by ZeroPointEnergy View PostWe all know you are just upset you can't write then n-word. That is really all it's about when people like you make up some bullshit outrage about free speech.
Maybe you should just try to not be a biggot when you work on international projects and try to keep your petty us racism an politics out
of it.
You think you're moral and virtuous? Please.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Panix View PostFair enough. But, would you agree with my opinion - that programmers and coders - especially those involved in Linux - at least, the big names and those who maintain the kernel - and on down - many of these are always bickering and insulting each other?
What these people can't seem to understand that in software we solve complex problems where there is no single "right" solution. There are many solutions each with their own set of advantages and disadvantages. Different developers, depending on their experience, will gravitate to different solutions based on their own internal logic. But this personality type cannot understand that just because their experience causes them to latch onto a particular solution doesn't make it the one true solution. They simply can't understand that other people's logic and experience might be equally valid. To them everything is a binary choice: right or wrong and the solution they came up with is always the right one because they only value their own logic and not anyone else's.
People often compare Linus (or the old Linus) to Kent because Linus occasionally used to interact almost as poorly with others (it was never the norm with Linus). In my opinion it's a bad comparison. Linus, even at the beginning of Linux, has always accepted that other people's solutions might be better than the one he came up with. In fact, Linus was downright self-deprecating at times. I think that's a very large part of the reason for Linux's immense success: Linus is able to subjugate his ego and empower others and their competing ideas in a way that Kent seemingly cannot or will not.
Originally posted by Panix View PostThese ppl are perfectionists (imho) - and they have egos and are very opinionated - some think they know best - and getting to agree and work together is a tough task. Perhaps, some of them decided they need a CoC - so, yes, in that respect, if that was the only motive for having it and it was only used for that task, then I would say, 'fine!'
I think the purpose of CoCs is to have basic rules to make sure that some people don't (purposefully or not) interact in a way that hinders the success of others. Many organizations will have such rules for practical reasons; an environment which makes it harder to retain some talent or for them to be successful hinders the success of the organization as a whole.
And some organizations will have such rules for moral reasons; they want to instill a certain cooperative culture and sense of community in the workplace (which can also facilitate the success of the organization) that reflects the leadership's view of a good environment for people to be happy.
Originally posted by Panix View PostBut, that doesn't seem to be what the CoC is being used for - it's to push agenda(s) especially woke/political agendas and forcing ppl who have differing (political opinions and ideas) to adhere to whatever the ones who run the CoC want and subscribe to.
You can't just say something like that with absolutely nothing to back it up. Cite specifics and explain the logic that makes you think that.
Originally posted by Panix View Post...
The problem is these CoC ppl and others have concentrated too much on KO's behavior...
That's their job. The entire purpose of the CoC is to focus on behavior. The technical discussions have nothing to do with it. I don't believe in criticizing people for doing their job even if I don't like it.
Originally posted by Panix View Post... and the 'apology' I think is not just about his individual comments to that one guy. I believe they don't like what other things he's said and believes - I bet they are well aware of his behavior and character and think if they provoke him enough - he'll say things in which they can pursue ousting him altogether.
Even if that were true so what? Linus & Co. control kernel development in Linus' kernel tree and they can run their project however they want. Welcome to the real world. And they don't need an excuse; they can oust bcachefs any time they want. In my opinion the only reason they haven't already done so is that they are trying really, really hard to be as fair, as accommodating and as inclusive as possible.
Originally posted by Panix View PostIt seems in the IT world - if you don't conform and adhere to the same politics, they try to cancel you or are so strict on your work - that they fault you for anything - the other thing regarding this is they want rigid rules and not everyone is good at following them - which this guy supposedly isn't. So, if they don't like his politics - they can probably 'squeeze these rules' even more - find where he's vulnerable and then get rid of him.
(First a small nit: software engineers don't consider themselves "IT." At least not around here. Some would probably consider being called that a borderline insult. Development and IT are two entirely different things with different skill sets.)
What evidence do you have that this has anything at all to do with politics? I see nothing to suggest that. I think you are seeing things that are not there or have a vastly different definition of "politics" than I do.
Originally posted by Panix View PostI can't see why else you would be so obsessed about him apologizing ...
Comment
-
Comment