“They introduce kernel bugs on purpose”

Re:“They introduce kernel bugs on purpose” by tut-urut-utut on Thursday April 22, 2021 @09:26AM (#26902459)

I don't read it like this. Alumnis and students are not banned from contributing, as long as they use their private emails. It's the university email domain that is "radioactive". The Assumption here is that someone who uses university email is submitting a patch on behalf of the said university, and that may be in a bad faith. It's up to the said university to show they have controls in place and that they are trustworthy.

It's the same as with employees. If I get a patch request from [email protected] I'll assume that it comes from IBM, and that person is submitting a patch on behalf of IBM, while for a patch coming from [email protected] I would not assume any IBM affiliation or bias, but assume person contributing as an individual.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:“They introduce kernel bugs on purpose” by yiyus on Friday April 23, 2021 @05:57AM (#26912941)

> Alumnis and students are not banned from contributing, as long as they use their private emails. It's the university email domain that is "radioactive".

That's not what the comment I was responding to said. It was very clear: "As far as I'm concerned this university and all of its alumni are radioactive". It does not say every kernel patch coming from this domain is radioactive, it clearly says "all of its alumni are radioactive".

You said before that alumni from the university could submit patches with their private emails, but according to what djbebs said, he would not. Do we agree that this would be wrong?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:“They introduce kernel bugs on purpose” by xdavidliu on Thursday April 22, 2021 @07:11PM (#26909238)

What if the same unethical people who ran the study submit patches from their gmail accounts?

[ Parent | on HN ]