A Case Study in Not Being a Jerk in Open Source

Re:A Case Study in Not Being a Jerk in Open Source by na85 on Thursday June 21, 2018 @10:33AM (#17365487)

I categorically disagree that the revised email makes the same case. The first sentence that Linus wrote indicates that he finds it questionable, but the revised statement puts words into Linus' mouth: "this looks ok but..."

That's not even the same sentiment. Okay versus Questionable.

Not sure why the Tone Police feel it's necessary to do this.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A Case Study in Not Being a Jerk in Open Source by pmiller2 on Thursday June 21, 2018 @10:45AM (#17365616)

He clearly doesn’t have a problem with the code, otherwise he wouldn’t say he could “live with” the changes. This portion could be better worded to convey the “code is ok, but the rationale is flawed” message. How would you rewrite it?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A Case Study in Not Being a Jerk in Open Source by na85 on Thursday June 21, 2018 @03:39PM (#17368587)

Au contraire I think it is patently obvious that he does have a problem with the code as written, otherwise why spend the energy to rebut it so vigorously?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A Case Study in Not Being a Jerk in Open Source by gary_bernhardt on Tuesday June 26, 2018 @07:37PM (#17404766)

He wasn't rebutting the code; he was rebutting the claims about following the C standard, which were made separate from the code. You missed this because its' buried in all of Linus' ranting. Linus merged these changes a few minutes later with no further discussion.

[ Parent | on HN ]