Bcachefs Changes Rejected Reportedly Due To CoC, Kernel Future "Uncertain"

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Panix
    replied
    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.
    Fair 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? These 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!'

    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • varikonniemi
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • ZeroPointEnergy
    replied
    Originally posted by TheMightyBuzzard View Post
    I love people who jump into "Free as in speech" projects and immediately try to put their boots on the neck of speech.
    We 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.

    Leave a comment:


  • clipcarl
    replied
    Originally posted by gotar View Post
    Sorry, but for "personal computers" you could as well use FAT16 and see no problems for years.
    Agree, but mdedetrich was talking about features like compression, tiering, power loss resiliency and encryption which are generally things that only enthusiasts on their personal computers care about. Enterprise users and by extension the kernel developers don't care (much) about such things. That's why I made the distinction. Enterprise users are very different consumers; they have physical security, reliable power, and the resources to scope their requirements out ahead of time and allocate the appropriate hardware to it.

    Originally posted by gotar View Post
    ​People 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 Post
    ​​First 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.

    Leave a comment:


  • fotomar
    replied
    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")
    You are arguing things that don’t exist

    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • logical
    replied
    Originally posted by fotomar View Post
    You accused me of “hate” without evidence. In some countries you would be guilty of libel

    what is it I’m supposed to “get,” again?
    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")

    Leave a comment:


  • logical
    replied
    Originally posted by TheMightyBuzzard View Post

    Sorry, none of that was opinion. It's all verifiably true at any time. But like I said, you're not interested in truth.
    And your methodology for said verification is?

    Leave a comment:


  • TheMightyBuzzard
    replied
    Originally posted by logical View Post

    I see only a regard for mean things, true things, not so much. What you call "truth" is merely your opinion. I guess only your opinions should be considered "truth" by everyone and anyone who doesn't agree should just be removed.
    Sorry, none of that was opinion. It's all verifiably true at any time. But like I said, you're not interested in truth.

    Leave a comment:


  • fotomar
    replied
    Originally posted by logical View Post

    I really didn't expect that you would get it.
    You accused me of “hate” without evidence. In some countries you would be guilty of libel

    what is it I’m supposed to “get,” again?

    Leave a comment:


  • logical
    replied
    Originally posted by fotomar View Post
    to be fair, you made no point
    I really didn't expect that you would get it.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X