Bcachefs Publishes Patches For Disk Accounting Rewrite

[timofonic]

It is pretty obvious that Kent is neurodivergent / a little autistic. As a neurodivergent person myself, I don't really see a problem with his responses, but I understand not a lot of people appreciate bluntness or directness in that manner.

Yes, I agree. And not every "aspie" is a (wife) killer.

I understand his behavior must be tuned ASAP. I see him as a very passionate and idealistic person. He believes in Free Software, despite having worked previously at Open Source anti-GPL corps.

Instead of crap such as CoC that often gets ignored and misinterpreted, there should be done something to improve the ecosystem. I sincerely believe an "Aspie" that surpassed these annoying social conflicts must write something a lot more detailed for other neurodivergent people. And not only that, Linux Foundation and others should invest at this and hiring specialized mental health professionals to cope this and tune people's behavior and solve these non-technical issues, instead wasting money on crap.

Ah okay, I only read the LKML threads and comments that people have linked here and on other Phoronix threads concerning bcachefs, and I've only ever seen the bluntness and directness I've described that others described as jerk behaviour. Haven't seen what I've quoted, but rejection sensitive dypshoria and emotional dysregulation is as you said, common.

Are you a mental health professional? FOSS needs support at this, specially Linux kernel.

[timofonic]

first, the script to skip bcachefs broke, triggered by kent abusing commit tags. He literally committed "Fixes:" (with nothing after the colon). so it ended up pulling it in the patch. but that had nothing to do with why the stable submission failed. and when kent was told why his patches weren't included in the stable rc, he blamed them for not telling him, but they did tell him (all documented in a separate email thread).

But the bigger issue was that kent didnt' generate the stable patches correctly, which involves tying the patches to specific commits in linus's kernel git. That is a policy rule of stable, which says that what is in stable has already been included in linus tree (doesn't have to be identical, but it has to be directly related).

This annoyed kent in several ways. First was the fact that kent didn't know about "git cherry-pick -x" flag was a documentation issue. Second, kent thinks he as bcachefs maintainer should be able to send whatever he thinks is appropiate, and that's supersedes tying it to linus's repo. Third, kent disagreed with sending things as patches, and thinks stable it should be some dashboard git branch merge tool.

Kent' always getting emotional over technical disagreements is his biggest fault, but his habit on lashing out when he made a bad assumption or was ignorant of some process or technical detail is another big issue of his. the number of times people have explained something to him he didn't know will pretty much guarantee he will start ranting about documentation.

Despite his attitude, he had a valid point. Linux kernel development documentation sucks, for example. FOSS needs a lot better documentation to evolve in a properly way.