UMN CS&E Statement on Linux Kernel Research

Re:UMN CS&E Statement on Linux Kernel Research by kodah on Wednesday April 21, 2021 @07:45PM (#26896825)

> The last line is "We will report our findings back to the community as soon as practical." It should be followed by "and we will provide an update in no more than 30 days".

I don't really think this is a worthwhile distinction. Personally, it comes off as trying to nanny a process that involves the Linux kernel maintainers and UMN Admins. There's a ban on UMN, probably until they show they can head off ethical issues. The public doesn't need to be sitting around demanding an update in 30 days or less. They'll act when they have confidence in their facts and the outcome, and the Linux community will undoubtedly act in kind.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:UMN CS&E Statement on Linux Kernel Research by bscphil on Thursday April 22, 2021 @02:21AM (#26899389)

I disagree. The associate department head named in the statement linked it on Twitter, immediately following up his comments with

> I very much welcome feedback from the participants who brought this to our attention: that's why I tagged @gregkh . Obviously, we would appreciate any guidance as to how we can get the Univ. of Minnesota contribution ban lifted.

This is pretty clearly one of their main interests in moving fast here. https://twitter.com/lorenterveen/status/1384954220705722369

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:UMN CS&E Statement on Linux Kernel Research by kodah on Thursday April 22, 2021 @11:27AM (#26903834)

What's your interest in "fast" here?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:UMN CS&E Statement on Linux Kernel Research by bscphil on Thursday April 22, 2021 @09:33PM (#26910118)

I don't understand the question. By fast I mean that they had a statement up on the website within 24 hours and the associate head of the department is already pinging members of the kernel team on Twitter to ask how they can get unbanned. That's moving very quickly by academic standards.

[ Parent | on HN ]