From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp2.linuxfoundation.org (smtp2.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.36]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE65CB19 for ; Thu, 16 Jul 2015 17:15:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtprelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0094.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.94]) by smtp2.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C40A1DC9B for ; Thu, 16 Jul 2015 17:15:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtprelay.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by smtpgrave01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C8295DD38 for ; Thu, 16 Jul 2015 17:15:24 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 13:15:21 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt To: James Bottomley Message-ID: <20150716131521.206b3cc3@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <1437063875.18768.59.camel@HansenPartnership.com> References: <20150708114011.3a1f1861@noble> <2879113.fraeuJIr2M@avalon> <20150709193718.GD9169@vmdeb7> <20150710143641.GW4341@mwanda> <20150710160714.GL111846@vmdeb7> <20150710222351.GA28632@kroah.com> <20150711000034.GU111846@vmdeb7> <20150711001348.GA30675@kroah.com> <20150711055441.GA6316@sudip-PC> <20150715212043.775be5d2@gandalf.local.home> <20150716132551.GH4039@sirena.org.uk> <20150716094720.2bf9f5ac@gandalf.local.home> <55A7C7FE.6000604@sonymobile.com> <20150716094125.16cdda73@lwn.net> <1437063875.18768.59.camel@HansenPartnership.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jason Cooper , Dan Carpenter , "ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org" Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] Recruitment (Reviewers, Testers, Maintainers, Hobbyists) List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, 16 Jul 2015 19:24:35 +0300 James Bottomley wrote: > Seriously, what is the actual problem? Who bites the heads off newbies > for sport? I ask because the first patch submission is usually treated > with helpfulness and tolerance, at least where I've been on the cc list. > The wrong phase of the merge cycle can be a bugger, particularly when > most people's attention is elsewhere, but it's not like it's a huge > deterrent. We all have developers who'd rather spit rats than submit a > patch to $opensourceprojecttheyfoundabugin but then, it's sometimes > because the reply might contradict their own mythology (or question > their reputation). Before we embark on a huge does of hair shirt and a > lavish process dump, what is the problem we're trying to solve? Our reputation. No seriously, the issue isn't really with what we do today, it's more about what we did yesterday. LKML use to be extremely cruel. It can still be with a few maintainers, but they are now the exception and not the norm. It's also headlines with Linus swearing and calling people names. Although, those too are few and far between, and Linus only does that to people he knows. I haven't seen him do that with anyone that is new to the list. As I stated in other emails, we really don't need to change. We just need to be conscious about what we say to patch submitters, and perhaps all we need is reminders to be "nice". I have no idea how to fix the "reputation" issue, and those that I have met that state "I'll never participate in Linux development again!", when asked, it has to do with something they encountered 10 years ago. All I have to say to them is, "come back, things have changed". -- Steve