Would love to see Linus come back from his break with an announcement of Xunil kernel completely rewritten, or he could call it by the original name Freax.

Is that necessary? I understood Linus owns the "Linux" trademark.

In the meantime, there is no doubt rejoicing over the victory in Microsoftland.

Edit: And I may have to migrate to OpenBSD earlier than I planned.

I think at this point it could be easier then purging a big chunk of the organization. Let RedHat and Microsh*t have it, they would still owe him royalties/licensing fees, but start over with an even better leaner kernel.

1. yes, it's real, and it just keeps on giving. look it up: CoC Linux SJW etc.
2. the CoC in question was created by Coraline Ehmke, but is extremely broad (similar to our LQ rules ;)) and, imo, pretty useless. It is also widely adopted by many, many projects (why, i cannot fathom. maybe they just want an easy way out and show the world how inclusive they are).
3. the CoC is independent of Coraline Ehmke's vitriolic nature, please keep that in mind. in fact, everyone taking part in this huuuuuuuuge discussion should keep that in mind.
4. do not empower those that want to "end meritocracy" and instate their version of social "justice". do not over-react. take a deep breath, accept the points that make sense, and reject the rest with authority.

I understand that what Linus Torvalds originally wrote about would evtl. become an issue one way or another.
let's phrase it like this:
the project (Linux, the kernel) keeps getting bigger and bigger: the code itself, its importance, real money involved, ever more people contributing to it.
it needs managing on more levels than just the technical.
why the already existing guidelines weren't good enough anymore, i cannot say.
but if you look at that folder, it also contains many other documents. Coraline's CoC is only a small one amongst them.

I'll say it once more:
The fact that Kroah-Hartman added his/her CoC to the kernel does not mean that Coraline Ehmke, or any other crazed SJW (*) for that matter, has any real influence on kernel developers, or even kernel development!!!

(*) i do not like the term SJW, and the addition "crazed" is there to signify that not all social justice warriors are crazed. but Coraline E. certainly is.

PS:
there's some merit to what was written about "false meritocracy".
but once again, people over-simplify the issue and say "end meritocracy" instead... :rolleyes:

PPS:
another interesting article: https://lulz.com/linux-devs-threaten...troversy-1252/

Maybe change the kernel name to "Eunux"?

Not at all, it's actually extremely useful. For instance, consider this:The TL;DR is this: The CoC applies to anyone participating in kernel development at all times, as long as they are "representing the project". And what does it mean to "represent the project"? According to the last sentence, it means whatever someone in a position of authority in the project defines it to mean.

So it explicitly cover activities outside the LKML and the commit logs, such as social media posts and any and all online and real life activities. This is indeed very useful if you want to start a witchhunt to get rid of someone you don't like. All you have to do is dig up some old twitter drama you can then quote out of context and blow completely out of proportion, in order to misrepresent the person in question.
That would only be true if the CoC just happened to be written by a person that, at some other time and for other reasons, had written something else that was questionable (like, say, a composer of music that also happened to write pamphlets expressing sympathies with totalitarian ideologies).

However, if one work is created explicitly to further the goals expressed in the other work, one has to consider both in the same context. And according to Coraline Ehmke herself, the CoC is a political document, designed to further a political goal. If that's her official position, who are we to disagree?
We know what happens if we do that. It's been tried elsewhere with disastrous consequences.

The CoC is in place, and there are plenty of activists out there right now going through Facebook posts, old tweets and even directory and file names in old GitHub repos, looking for something that could possibly be perceived as objectionable.

On the off chance that they can't actually find anything, they'll just fabricate an accusation out of whole cloth, like this. As you can see, that didn't come from Ms. Ehmke, but rather from one of her many devoted followers.

We ignore this at our peril.

But it most certainly does mean exactly that. It gives them a powerful tool they can leverage, and as we've seen with the slanderous accusations against Theodore Ts'o, they absolutely will waste no time making use of it.

This should come as no surprise to anyone, since have followed this exact playbook countless times in the past. And they're not exactly subtle about it either, raising "issues" on projects they themselves have never been a part of and never contributed to.

Careful, now. Someone from the "inclusive" crowd may read that and decide you just failed the purity test, and that you need to be "called out" publicly as a misogynist/homophobe/whatever.

Consider this: If one of these activists were to read this thread, and was then able to connect my LQ handle to a name on the LKML (which they won't be able to do, much to their chagrin), what do you think would happen?

Actually, no. There's absolutely no merit to anything in that "manifesto", it's all sophistry and logical fallacies. But that's a topic for another thread.

Seems like thats what they are moving towards already. Next they will ban USB ports, plugs etc... becomes those male ends are not appropriate for the front holes.
Ref: https://www.reddit.com/r/GenderCriti..._hole_instead/

Ser Olmy, the more i think about this the more i agree that the current CoC has to go, because it really messes with coder's lives and creates rich soil for crazed SJWs.

but just for the record, i never said we should ignore anyhting.

________________________________________________________________

[ joke removed ]

i have previously replied jokingly to some other jokes.
i don't see it as a big problem, but i recognize that others do and have therefore removed my joking replies.
this does not mean that i changed my critical opinions one iota!!!
and nobody has prompted me to do this either.
i just think we need to have a very serious and concentrated discussion about all this, and not vainly push the other side's buttons.
_______________________________________________________________


PS:
i reserve the right to dislike people independently of their sexual orientation, gender, colour and yes, even political standing.

[ joke removed ]

i have previously replied jokingly to some other jokes.
i don't see it as a big problem, but i recognize that others do and have therefore removed my joking replies.
this does not mean that i changed my critical opinions one iota!!!
and nobody has prompted me to do this either.
i just think we need to have a very serious and concentrated discussion about all this, and not vainly push the other side's buttons.

It's obvious that the social-justice-warriors are now taking more power and place, even in a place that does not care about such things or them. Political correct hippocrats with a weird agenda to make people believe certain things.

This has nothing to do with open source or software development, it is about politics forcefully being introduced into the community.

It's suppose to be a free community of loosely associated individuals across the world. I think everyone should take their own personal responsibility in behaving appropriately rather than terms being dictated on them in a "code of conduct" kinda thing.

It is most likely an awful monster yes. Personally I like FSF alot more than the "Opensource" gang, but I have to say the whole open source community has also been quite harmonious and functional until now.

It seems to be one that just want to come in and spoil the party for no reason. Forcing through illogical changes that makes absolutely no sense at all. But that's how those kinda people are. They are tiny little tyrants who think they have a right to force the rest of society for their own ideals and will, even in places where it is completely irrelevant.

For the same reason there are disclaimers, you need to remind some people not to do stupid things. Here is Chromium's code-of-conduct. Apart from it being inspired by "...[the] Geek Feminism Code of Conduct, the Django Code of Conduct and the Geek Feminism Wiki "Effective codes of conduct" guide", there isn't anything outrageous, though most of it is self-explanatory. If that was the code-of-conduct being proposed instead of the current one, there probably wouldn't be too much of a problem.

It's somewhat better than the Linux Kernel CoC, but it's still filled with subjective weasel words and threats of draconian measures. For instance, they "will not tolerate" the following:
The problem is who gets to define what does and does not constitute "harassment" or "intimidation", or what an "offensive" or "inappropriate" comment may be. (And what exactly is a "violent" comment anyway?)

These are, by their very nature, entirely subjective concepts, and you have no way of knowing or controlling what other, random people may or may not consider inappropriate or offensive. These CoC documents leave it up to the (potentially perpetually) offended to decide when someone else has hurt their feelings, and they can then legitimately make the claim that a breach of the CoC has occurred.

The next step would be to demand sanctions, such as:So let's say I submit some really poor code with bad formatting and an obvious bug. You point out that my code is broken and that I'm not adhering to the style guidelines. As it turns out, I'm offended that you point out my mistakes in public without sugar-coating the message. Congratulations, you're now in the wrong and owe me an apology, because I didn't find your style of communication to be sufficiently "kind", "respectful" or "inclusive".

Now, let's say that later I make the same stupid mistake again, and you point out that once again, the executable segfaults and I need to fix my bug. I now feel harassed by you, since you've done this before. And since you decided to concede to my demands the last time and make a half-hearted apology, I can now point to that incident as proof that you admitted to being in the wrong. Congratulations, you're now a repeat offender, and should face more serious sanctions.

If everyone acts reasonably, a CoC is not needed. If everyone is not acting reasonably, a CoC will be abused.

Do they both identify as male usb cables?

Just had a thought, the SJW's are demanding a non binary world (which is impossible), but how do they intend to code in this non binary world?

Quantum computing. ;)