Linus Explains his Patch Policy 396
An anonymous reader writes "For everyone who has been wondering the method behind Linus's seeming madness of accepting or dropping patches, he has finally given a thorough explanation. A must read for anyone who wants to get their favorite feature into the next release of the kernel."
how about this (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:how about this (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:how about this (Score:5, Informative)
Quoting Linux from his post:
I think this says it all... don't whine... DO! If you want something in Linux, for god sakes, make a useful, meaniful contribution... don't whine about it on some out of the way, hole in the ground area...
Re:how about this (Score:4, Funny)
Ah, I was wondering who they named 'Linux' after...
Re:how about this (Score:3, Insightful)
Wrong. If you want to work on interfaces, either go take a job with Apple and work on Aqua, or make up your own UI appearance. Aqua is the property of Apple Computer; it's a trademark, and nobody else has the right to make a user interface just like it.
<rant>That's fundamentally the problem with the open source community. By and large, they're more interested in stealing other people's ideas (Evolution looks so much like Outlook there ought to be royalties involved) than coming up with their own.</rant>
Re:how about this (Score:4, Insightful)
Because there weren't a million Lotus 123 clones out there, until the killer Lotus 123 clone. Windows has never completely ripped off the Macintosh; and Word didn't look exactly like every other wordprocessor out there. There weren't a million Doom rip-offs written, either. All closed source.
Re:how about this (Score:4, Interesting)
There's just no innovation to speak of going on in the open source community. Apple, Microsoft, Sun, and other companies are trying like hell to come up with something new. Sun basically redefined the web application over the past few years with Java and related technologies. Apple is trying to design a user interface from a blank slate, and doing a pretty damn good job. Microsoft... well, say what you want about them, but they're trying like crazy to come up with new ideas like Hailstorm and SOAP. Not every idea is a good one, but at least they're new and different.
Let's see some examples of new ideas in the open source community. KDE and Gnome are fighting it out to see which one can be the blandest, least user-friendly desktop environment. Linux, as neat as it is, is caught between trying to catch up to the leading server OS's, like Solaris or IRIX, and trying to catch up to desktop OS's like OS X and XP. It's doing an okay job of both, but not an exceptional one of either. And think of all the brainpower that's being wasted on dumb ideas like the Mozilla sidebar! If only the community rewarded-- through peer validation or whatever you open-source guys use for currency-- original ideas, instead of incomplete implementations of other people's ideas, we might actually see something revolutionary and interesting come out of the open source community. As it stands right now, all I see is a bunch of projects whose names really ought to start with the words "yet another."
Mod me down if you feel that's the right thing to do. This post is definitely off-topic, except to the extent that I'm extending an idea I introduced upthread. And it's flamebait only inasmuch as I will certainly get flamed for it. It's not a troll, but I'm sure people who disagree with me will hold the opinion that it is.
So moderators, do what you must. But know before you do that I'm just saying what lots and lots of other people are already thinking.
Re:how about this (Score:3, Interesting)
Even that has been done a million times in closed world. You know what simulatio/emulation means? Think in example of the PC-BIOS. PC's only started of when other companies managed to make functionally exact copies of the IBM Bios. And not this is perfectly legal and okay. Making functionally exact copies with the same interface is not coping like copyright law forbids.
Think of another example, the car. Ford started building cars, with gas and brakes and all that. Then other companies started also to make cars, different internals/details, but functionally just the same. Are you saying that was not okay, and ford should be the only car manufacturer out there? Or the first car company that came out with ABS. ABS is good is it? All other car manufactures copied it's behaviour, you say they shouldn't have?
Re:how about this (Score:5, Insightful)
Okay, I guess we've got a big fan of both KDE and Gnome going. Aside from how impossibly wrong the above statement is, let's move along here....
trying to catch up to the leading server OS's, like Solaris or IRIX
Trying to catch up?? What freaking planet have you been living on for the past 2 years? IRIX's core market, movie animation, has all but vanished due to Linux. Sun is running about as scared as they ever have over Solaris. It's very fair to say that open source has done a wee more than just "catch up".
we might actually see something revolutionary
What, like the core infrastructure of the Internet your browsing on now? Who knows, maybe that'll amount to something some day.
For your own well being, you might want to consider taking a shot of Pebto, relax a bit, and actually take a hard look at what you're talking about here. A clue stick might just find you!
Re:how about this (Score:4, Informative)
You mean like Quattro Pro (sued for having the exact same menus and keys as Lotus 123)?
It started with the original GNU programs-- feature-for-feature copies of AT&T's utilities--
So it would have been better to toss a new interface on? Why? From everything I've heard, the GNU utilities were and many ways still are vastly superior to the proprietary duplictates, from having more features to actually working when fed 8-bit data and 150-character lines.
In any case, what about Perl, TeX, Emacs and NetPBM? They all blazed trails where nobody else had gone.
Microsoft...
You mean the people who created yet another PDF? While open source people created DjVu, a format that can encode data in ways that make it feasible to put scans of books on the web?
lots of other people are already thinking.
Apparently a lot of people who don't actually use free software, and don't feel the need for some of these tools.
Re:how about this (Score:3, Informative)
Cough... Emacs, X11... Cough.
Cough... Apache, Zope... Cough..
Cough.. Perl, Python, Ruby, Ocaml, PHP... Cough
Cough... Parrot, Zinc... Cough
Cough.. OpenBSD, SELinux, TurstedBSD, ErOS.. Cough..
Cough...L4 nanokernel, persistant processes, HURD... Cough
Cough.. Gnutella, Freenet.. Cough...
Unless you look, most of OSS's most innovative stuffis eiterh half hidden, or elseso pervasive that you forget it's there.
Did someone say something about nothing new comming from the OSS community? It's easy to point at a handful of things and say there's no innovation going on and then forget that if you do the same thing with MS you're stuck looking at WinME, Explorer (not IE, Explorer), Word, and Solitaire. There's a lot of OSS that has become so common that it may have passed below your radar. Pray tell, which non-Free products are Perl, PHP, Python, Ruby, Ocaml, Apache, Zope, SELinux, TrustedBSD, and L4-Hazelnut "exact functional coppies" of? I still don't see Microsoft or Sun's mandatory access controls.
I agree that the OSS community sometimes does things that give the impression that all of the OSS projects are cheap ripoffs. However, I think that at least in terms of operating systems and languages, you'll see that OSS leads the pack in innovation. (No, I don't consider the JVM or the CLR at all innovative. Dis is an innovative non-Free virtual machine, but it's the only one I've seen.)
Oh, and I have an IRIX box. It's a poor excuse for a modern *NIX. (No, I'm not just being a Linux fanboy, Solaris, *BSD, etc. are great *NIXes in thier own ways. (Even Solaris x86). IRIX's only redeaming feature is that it's pretty and I love the hardware.) As soon as I port the code that's on there, it's getting Debianized.
For the record, I'd also like to point out that both MS and Apple's default window managers don't compare favorablywith many of the X11 WMs out there, and it's highly non-trvial to change window managers. (Running X11 doesn't work with most of thier programs, so that doesn't count. Third party WMs for MS OSes suffer stability problems, appearently stemming from an insufficiently reverse-engineered API.)
Recognisable models (Score:4, Insightful)
Ever checked out Lycroris [lycoris.com]? Looks familiar doesn't it. Thought and design theft go both ways though, notice what happens when you push "tab" with a half-typed file/directory in winXP (and I think 2k) command prompt? Hmmm, somehow I think that one got ripped off from the linux (perhaps unix or previous other) community, was it GPL'ed?
The point of making products like evolution similar to office is to provide the user with something they can relate to easily enough while providing them with better functionality or stability, etc (or just functionality on an alternate medium).
People recognise Microsoft layouts. In fact, I even like them. Chances are that if MS software didn't crash so much and wasn't so fricking expensive and/or ignorant in EULA's etc, then even linux users could find a use for it.
Linux systems can get a lot by mimicking windows graphical designs and ideas. MS can learn about (but probably won't) useful functionality and ability to grow from linux.
Just IMHO though...
Re:how about this (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh please, Open Source is not the only community that copies other people's ideas. Games (Closed source I might add) for the past 20 years have done so as well. Guess you never heard the old adage: Imitation is The Sincerest Form Of Flattery.
How exactly do you *steal* an idea? Do you mean copying without crediting the source?
I believe Jefferson said it best:
"It has been pretended by some, (and in England especially,) that inventors have a natural and exclusive right to their inventions, and not merely for their own lives, but inheritable to their heirs.
-- The Letters of Thomas Jefferson: 1743-1826 [let.rug.nl]
Cheers
--
Philosophy is a game with objectives but no rules.
Mathematics is a game with rules but no objectives.
- Unknown
Re:I'm just wondering what a new XWindows would ta (Score:4, Insightful)
There are a few days I love OS X, like when I am trying to view something I just can't on linux, or when I am video editing. I am glad I have the choice. I bought my laptop more on features per price that what OS it ran, and Apple had everything I wanted all in one package.(mainly built in modem, built in 802.11b, built in firewire, built in usb, and long battery life).
I think it's great that people prefer differnent OSes. The OS is just the tool to accomplish a job, some are better than others.
A serious alternative to X-Windows would be cool to at least play with the concept.
I can identify with the 'squeaky wheel' attitude (Score:5, Insightful)
It's more like 'the squeaky wheel gets whacked with a hammer and replaced with something better'.
People need to remember that when dealing with intelligent people, if you cannot get your point of view across without resorting to whining, you may need to reconsider what it is you are asking.
Japanese Proverb... (Score:3, Interesting)
Deru kugi wa utareru.
"The protruding nail gets hammered."
Seems appropriate. (And note, this is 'hammered' in a non-beverage-related manner.)
You Linux guys are cool (Score:4, Funny)
Re:You Linux guys are cool (Score:5, Funny)
Tree (Score:4, Funny)
Cool! Thanks Linus. Can you get it here in time for Christmas? ;-)
Re:Tree (Score:4, Funny)
Linus doesn't choose the trees himself, he has his manic-depressive friend Charlie do it for him and he always picks the worst tree on the lot every year.
Actual Quote... (Score:4, Funny)
Don't get in a fight with Linus. (Score:4, Funny)
Being a whiney user just might move you from the "human" to the "polar bear" category.
yes! (Score:2, Funny)
or better known as the
"Penguin Man vs Rabid Crazy Man Battle Royale"
at stake the naming rights to linux
all $$$ goes to the microsoft legal defense fund
nbfn
Bill Gates did it different (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Bill Gates did it different (Score:2)
King Edmund III
CEO, Internet Royale
"Delivering the Internet to the alternate universe since 1887."
Err.. (Score:3, Funny)
Has Linus been watching Oz [hbo.com] marathons again?
Common sense? (Score:5, Insightful)
When did this practice become so common. Far too often do you hear someone griping about something before ever going about it in the correct way.
+ 2 cents "We're on a mission from God" Elwood Blues
Re:Common sense? (Score:2)
And before someone bashes me here, I'm not a linux kernel geek, but you wouldn't be able to tell it from my bookshelf. The stuff interests me more than I think is healthy. :-)
Re:Common sense? (Score:5, Insightful)
That's the problem... you're putting geeks into the wrong group. Geeks aren't "normal" they're (well, usually) "above average" so you need to think differently to understand them. No that was not an Apple plug. When you get people with above average intelligence, who may have been abused by those whom they consider "lower" than themselves, you get egotistical bastards. Elitists. Assholes. Call them whatever you want, and I don't claim that I am immune from this name-calling.
Just think about it... if you think you're smart and your work is important, why wouldn't someone else think the same? Wouldn't you get pissed off and revert to more "childish" methods of communication and getting your way?
Now, assuming you've followed me so far, toss in a bit of under-developed social skills and you've got a system administrator waiting to happen! Before you flame me, I'm just kidding -- but keep in mind that many of the intelligent people in this world have advanced as far as they have by sacrificing other daily aspects of life, such as social skills (and perhaps hygene).
Just imagine what happens when a "regular Joe" thinks he is the smartest guy on Earth...
Re:Common sense? (Score:5, Insightful)
As Mr. Vonnegut once wrote, the problem with really stupid people is that they're too stupid to realize there's such a thing as smart.
Now, I'd further suggest that it actually doesn't take the greatest brain in the world to write code. It does take some modicum of training and experience, yes, but not real smarts. I've personally known some people I would consider rather less than mediocre in the brains department who make a living writing code. Not great code true, not code as *art*, but at least decent code.
(Don't get all huffy on me yet, I know that *we* certainly don't fit into that catagory, dear Reader)
I'd further suggest that many of these people *believe* they are smart simply because they write code. Why by golly they're bonafide *programers,* which we all know is the elite of the elite of the elite of the smart. Them Nuke-you-leer fizzycists have nothin' on 'em.
Enter Mr. Vonnegut.
Enter people who whine to Linus that they somehow have the right to demand their projects being interjected into *his* code.
At least that's my theory at the moment. Come back later. I'll have several more if you don't like that one.
KFG
Re:Common sense? (Score:3, Insightful)
Now, I'd further suggest that it actually doesn't take the greatest brain in the world to write code.
And with that I agree... It's not how much better than someone else that you can think, but simply how you can think. It's a mixture of creative and logical thinking for good coding and just logical thinking for code that works...
My Wife (Yes, I'm married and read slashdot, live with it...) is no good at maths (primarily because one of her early teachers rather than showing her how to do something ridiculed her for not understanding... She practically refuses to try to learn maths now) but is far ahead of me in both her writing and artistic skills. By artistic skills I mean almost all branches of art, sculpture, painting (oils and watercolours), drawing (pen and ink, pencil, charcoal...) and so on. This is not because I'm intelligent and she isn't, or vice versa. It's because we think in different ways.
I'd further suggest that many of these people *believe* they are smart simply because they write code. Why by golly they're bonafide *programers,* which we all know is the elite of the elite of the elite of the smart. Them Nuke-you-leer fizzycists have nothin' on 'em.
My Goodness, if Programmers are the elite of the elite of the elite of the smart, and Nuclear Physicists are also smart then where does that place me? I've got a degree in Applied Physics (I specialised in Nuclear physics, and I've worked in a large Nuclear Research facility)... AND a degree in Software Engineering. I must be in the creme de la creme of the elite of the elite of the elite of the smart... :-}
Z.
Trusted Computing (Score:5, Insightful)
That's gonna be one for the quote book ten years from now...
Great Pumpkin (Score:5, Funny)
tree is called "Linus' tree" for a reason. The only thing you are
ENTITLED to is to have your own tree.
Linus
Now if you'll excuse me, I'll go back to waiting for the great pumpkin to arrive.
Vendors matter more. (Score:5, Insightful)
Vendors have the motivation to test and add your patch, as long as it adds something that a customer might want. This means that your patch gets well tested. This means that Linus can treat your patch with some confidence without knowing your work.
Of course, getting into Linus's tree is the Holy Grail of OpenScource development. It's hard not to take it personally if your patch gets rejected.
No vendor uses stock Linux tree anyway (Score:5, Insightful)
The big Linux vendors are usually much more conservative about what goes into their trees. But the vendors also react to customer critisism to add very useful features to their kernels - features that Linus often ignores because he doesn't have much interest some particular area. The Linux vendors have to innovate to stay in business, afterall. Like RedHat bumping up HZ to give a much smoother desktop experience. Redhat is also doing pioneering work on highly efficient kernel threads that will likely show up in their kernel before Linus'.
RedHat's kernel tree resembles the -ac tree moreso than Linus' tree (gee, might that have to do with the fact that Alan Cox works for RedHat?)
Linus' tree is not as relevant as it once was.
Re:No vendor uses stock Linux tree anyway (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, Slackware uses the stock Linus tree - I guess on the principle that Patrick Volkerding knows that his target market knows what patches (if any) they want to apply...
Re:On the other hand. . . (Score:3, Informative)
From The Linux Counter machine report:
Distribution
107953 registrations entered 109463 values
conectiva 1428 1.32%
debian 14625 13.55%
diy 1445 1.34%
mandrake 20342 18.84%
red hat 32051 29.69%
s.u.s.e 12481 11.56%
slackware 12782 11.84%
Others 14309 13.25%
This is probably somwhat skewed though, as root gets an email from Pat, which, amongst other helpful advice, invites us to register with the Linux Counter.
Re:No vendor uses stock Linux tree anyway (Score:3, Interesting)
That's so tacky. Watch your cache miss rate go way up from all those unnecessary context switches.
A useful thing for developers to try is turning down the tick rate to, say, 5HZ. Everything that polls then becomes glacially slow. Fix those things to be event-driven.
As an example, early Netscape (pre-Mozilla) on the Mac had a major polling problem. Every clock tick, it checked every bookmark to see if it needed to be dimmed out, whether the menu was dropped or not. Large bookmarks lists slowed it down to a crawl. Cranking up the tick rate doesn't fix problems like that.
What every Slashdotter should read (Score:3, Interesting)
It's my kernel... (Score:4, Interesting)
Take note that Linus decided to remind us nine times that it is his tree. I am a big fan of Linux, but not so much of Linus. The way he wrote that letter made him seem a bit childish.
I just wanted to get my thoughts out there. There is no need to mod me down.
Re:It's my kernel... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It's my kernel... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:It's my kernel... (Score:2)
Re:It's my kernel... (Score:5, Insightful)
Come on - he gave us a kernel that so very many of us run, and let's be honest - he's had a huge impact on computing today. He's just making a point; his tree, his way. The same goes for every other tree out there, they just have different ways of showing it. Vendor trees probably have a comittee of people deciding what kind of path it should take, presumably with a project manager making final decisions.
We also know that he accepts patches from people he doesn't neccesarily get along with, from trivial patches to extensive sub-systems. He was just being a little brutally honest, and I can respect that.
Besides; consider the frustration of having tens of thousands of (wannabe) kernel hackers all around the world who all believe that it's somehow their right to have their latest c00l patch included in the Linus kernel tree. I think he handles it quite well. After all, he's still actively working on the kernel and participating in the whole Linux experience, right? Many people would have taken their ball and gone home by now.
Re:It's my kernel... (Score:5, Insightful)
And it looks like he's encouraging you to do that.
"But Linus, I want you to do everything for me the way I like it." Gee... tough shit. It's GPL'd code, do whatever you like. I don't think your argument makes any sense. It doesn't sound whiny or juvenile to me.
Re:It's my kernel... (Score:5, Insightful)
All he wants is some assurance that the patch functions well. If you're some stranger and he's never heard of you nor your patch, how the hell is to be assured that your patch won't blow up a computer and embarass him? Do you think Linus can test every patch he gets himself?
If he requires that you can prove a large working installed base, so what? It is HIS. It has HIS name on it. He approves it, personally, every release. And when it screws up, it reflects on HIM. Not you. Well, you too, but the product isn't named after you; it's named after him, and most users won't see who is responsible for the code.
Linus wants a good kernel, and if he isn't discriminating about what he takes, it'll go to shit real quickly. So if you think its childish that he grows to trust people who continually write good code, or that he trusts patches that have been distributed in versien 45+1/2 of RedHat and with no known issues, maybe that is childish.
But there's nothing wrong with require well-tested patches for his code. It's his tree, his name, and his reputation on the line. Good for him, for doing it and saying this.
Responsibility requires authority (Score:3, Insightful)
The ball analogy is flawed, he doesn't have the only ball in the game. I think a team coach is a better analogy, he wants to make the team succeed so he chooses the players and strategies to the best of his abilities for the benefit of the game he is playing.
Criticizing leaders is so easy. Step up and make a difference, otherwise you bring nothing positive to the table.
A bit of context (Score:5, Informative)
From the very beginning [alaska.edu], Linus was saying he thought this patch was something that should be driven by vendors - i.e. put it in their trees *first*, and then it may find a way into Linus' tree later.
Hence the constant references to 'this is my tree, this is how I do things'.
The whole thread [alaska.edu] is actually quite interesting. If you're thinking of suggesting a patch, I suggest you read the whole lot to get an idea about how best to approach it.
Re:It's my kernel... (Score:2)
Remember the kid in school that would always say, "My ball, my rules"?
Yup. But I never remember him making the plans and the materials for the ball freely available to anyone and everyone, so that they could make their own ball and their own rules.
Take note that Linus decided to remind us nine times that it is his tree. I am a big fan of Linux, but not so much of Linus. The way he wrote that letter made him seem a bit childish.
Yeah. I'm sure that the developers who whine and pester him do it a lot more than nine times, but you never see that - you only see his public statement after putting up with it, again and again, over and over, ad infinitum. Frankly, I suspect if you had to deal with his mailbox you'd be doing the same thing.
There is nothing new in his message - its all been said before, repeatedly, in many ways and variations. It all has to be said repeatedly, because people don't listen, don't get it, and don't want to get it. If its childish, that's because it has to be reduced to the level of the audience.
Re:It's my kernel... (Score:2, Interesting)
Bear in mind as well, by the way, that your analogy is entirely, utterly incorrect. I hate to break it to you, but Redhat et. al. have made a TON of changes to the versions of the kernels that they distribute. A closer analogy would be "My ball, my rules..but if you want to make another ball like mine, or even paint it a new color, that's okay too. In fact everyone must be allowed to do this, but when it comes to my OWN ball, my rules." Please try and do a little research beforehand, O "big fan of Linux." You know, on minor little issues like the fact that the kernel is GPLed, and what the GPL is. I mean hey, if you dislike Linus so much, you're actually free to take the code, accept patches from others that don't get accepted, and do whatever the hell you want with them so long as you contribute that work back. Your message comes off as being a lot more childish than his, if for nothing else than its lack of knowledge on the issue.
I love it how you justified your being modded up, by the way, you're one of the more obvious trolls I've seen today. Not as obvious as some loser posting goatse.cx links all over the comments, but obvious nonetheless.
Re:It's my kernel... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It's my kernel... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:It's my kernel... (Score:3, Insightful)
If you want Linus to include your patches, ie, you want him to run your code on his computers, you better give him a good reason to do so. If you want your code to run on your computers, make your own tree. If you want your code to run on every RedHat install, persuade RedHat. Its really not that difficult a concept.
Re:It's my kernel... (Score:5, Insightful)
I think if you read the entire thread (in the LKML) to which he was responding, you might be a bit less critical.
Basically people were bitching and moaning endlessly because Linus hadn't taken their patches, and he had already responded in less explicit terms trying to tell them why -- but some still didn't seem to get it. This post was Linus getting fed up and explaining his position in a way that no one could fail to understand.
Re:It's my kernel... (Score:2)
Yes, but most kids don't say, "My ball, but you can make an exact copy of it, for free, for your own use. You can play with your ball with whatever rules you want. You can take my basketball and turn it into a baseball, or a golf ball, or a Calvinball, or a shuttlecock, to meet your own needs. You can give away as many copies of my ball--or your derivative ball--as you want, to whomever you want. You can play with as many--or as few--other players as you wish."
"Oh, and if you like my ball, and you want to contribute to improvements--maybe a more durable covering, a prettier finish--I welcome your suggestions, but I won't be bound by them. It is my ball, after all."
Re:It's my kernel... (Score:2)
That hardly matters if you're sitting in a ball factory. If Linus won't let you play with his ball, pick up one of the thousands on the floor.
Take note that Linus decided to remind us nine times that it is his tree.
I suppose you've been following the mailing list for the past six months? So you've can count how many times people have suggested that maybe it isn't Linus's tree by their incessant suggestions that he hasn't the right to do with it as he pleases? I suspect he's being pretty conservative.
Re:It's my kernel... (Score:2, Interesting)
Linus didn't take his ball and go home. (Score:4, Insightful)
Now some people seem to be complaining that they aren't happy with the ball he gave them, they want *his* ball. They don't want to make the rules for their own game, they want him to play with *his* ball and *his* friends to *their* rules.
I've known people like that.
They're generally refered to as *assholes* by the general populace.
Linus was responding in a mature and adult way to *adults* who were behaving as children who always want what someone *else* has.
Did he mention it was *his* nine times? Why would he do something like that? Perhaps because. . . are you ready for it? Because it's his?
*They already have their own.* Linus gave it to them.
If you give me a car, any car I want, and all the tools, parts and materials to modify it as I will are you suggesting that *you* would be childish for refusing to comply with my *demand* that you paint yours plaid and glue an elephant to its roof?
Hell, this opens up whole new vistas of possibilities. I think tomorrow I'll get old Bill on the blower and demand that the next version of Windows be Linux based, and if he refuses to comply. . . why, of course he's just being childish.
KFG
Interesting. (Score:4, Funny)
In other words, I totally comprehend his message and as such, I'll place his suggestions in effect immediately.
Re:Interesting. (Score:2, Redundant)
And The Issue Is? (Score:2, Interesting)
I assume that most linux users know how to build a kernel and in the same respect how to apply patches to that kernel (this isn't exactly rocket science.. it wasn't made to confuse you), so are you all really too lazy to build in the patches you want?
Right on! (Score:4, Interesting)
My company (which sells a commercial product to run under Linux) have produced several enhancements to the kernel and have been able to get some of them into the Linus' Tree, some were not accepted, but is now incorporated into a well known Linux Distribution.
It all boils down to what I would call the Mitnik Factor (Tm). Namely how good your social skill is, i.e. how good you are to convince Linux in a PROFESSIONAL way that the patch you have made actually will add a value to the general kernel release and that the whole community will be better off with the patch in Linus' Tree rather than outside of it. (Now that is ofcourse the hard part)
Filtering (Score:2)
Tree discussions always ome up near christmass... (Score:5, Funny)
Chould we call this the Linus Christmass Tree phenomenom?
Re:Tree discussions always ome up near christmass. (Score:2)
Chould we call this the Linus Christmass Tree phenomenom?
Considering the week, I suspect more of a 'great pumpkin' phenomenon.
Re:Tree discussions always ome up near christmass. (Score:3, Funny)
So Linus still believes in the Great Pumpkin? ARRRRRGGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!!!
Yes, I should be slapped for that. Good grief....
I Wish All PMs Could Communicate Like That (Score:3)
I like this (Score:2, Interesting)
Finally, someone who refuses to snivel. I'll bet he's got a strong backbone too!
I hate to say this in such a generalized term, but he's very right that no one is entitled to have their patch accepted. Americans think everything is an entitlement. That isn't so and the rest of the worlds going to get really pissed of and blow something up.
Linus' dead-on (Score:4, Interesting)
No-one's patch is entitled to be incorporated into Linus' tree. It is his tree, and he puts stuff in there that he feels is the best. Would you really want Linus putting something in his tree which he didn't feel good about or was unsure of? When Linus puts something in his tree, that's his certification that he thinks it's good and useful. Its his word on that in a sense. The minute he starts putting stuff in because people pester him, his word that something is good and useful to his knowledge becomes useless.
Chances are that if the patch is good, Linus will accept it provided he's given enough time to properly evaluate it. Linus is a human being like the rest of us. He can't thoroughly evaluate hundreds of patches coming in a week before the feature-freeze deadline. Try to give him the same breathing room to do a job you'd give anyone else. Also, remember, Linus doesn't have to do anything. He's doing this voluntarily as a service to the public. If you think you're patch is good and useful enough to be incorporated, and Linus rejected it, then go out and prove that its good. Put it in you're own tree or convince a vendor to do so; then people will use it, and if its good, word will get around. Once that happens, more likely than not, Linus will put it in his tree.
I've submitted about a hundred articles to Slashdot, many of them on what I thought were good "your rights online" issues. Do you know how many submissions of mine have been accepted? 1. It was on Creg Ventor, the man who used his own DNA to help sequence the human genome; ironically, I thought that was one of my worst submissions. Yet, believe it or not, you don't see me whining to the editors of Slashdot or in the discussions about it. I realize that many many many other submissions have been made, that the editors have to choose what they feel is best, and that they have to create a variety; I also realize that they're human beings.
Other people would do well to do the same in regards to patches.
God I hate Plantlife (Score:5, Funny)
Shouldn't this all balance out at some point?
Summary (Score:5, Interesting)
There is a patch that has strong vendor support (like vendors have already signed contracts involving services from this patch).
This patch is a service offered on many other commercial unixes (Irix, Solaris, AIX, etc..)
Linus considers this patch:
a) to be dangerous
b) to be difficult to test
c) likely to have the most problems on the x86 platform which is Linux's home platform
d) supporting it might add long term maintainability problems to the kernel
The kernel hackers whom Linus trusts seem to agree with his assessment.
What Linus wants is
a) for the vendors to support this patch over a long period of time on a wide range of systems.
b) For there to be some evidence that Linux users (as opposed to Linux vendors) actually want this feature.
So what you have is a fight between big guns: Suse, United Linux, IBM.. and Linus.
Full Metal Kernel (Score:4, Funny)
Of interest might be.... (Score:5, Interesting)
It has worked quite well... (Score:2)
That said, I still like FreeBSD and OpenBSD very much. I have purchased OpenBSD disc sets and really like the ports arrangement.
If you are going back to being a 'smug BSD user', is that because it makes you feel good? Smugness heavily implies that is the case.
Re:It has worked quite well... (Score:2)
Incorrect. Mac OS X counts as a BSD and it thoroughly has GNU/Linux whipped when it comes to user acceptance.
Re:It has worked quite well... (Score:3, Interesting)
Mac OS could be counted as a *BSD, but that is a very recent trend. The Mac following wasn't built because of the new *BSD foundation. OTOH, I know of no one that is using Linux, FreeBSD or OpenBSD that is using it because it the foundation of another semi-emulated OS environment. As an example, I haven't seen anyone that is using Linux and wine/winex/vmware/win4lin/basilisk/etc... as their main operating environment ( sans Linux apps).
Still, if Apple were to release an X86 version of MacOS 10.2, I would buy a copy to try as my main desktop. It would be to try Mac apps, not run FreeBSD specific apps, I would just use FreeBSD if that was my only goal and I assume the goal of most Mac users is to run Mac apps, not FreeBSD stuff. That makes for some stretching to count MacOS 10.x as FreeBSD. Do Mac people run two OSes? If they have to pick between describing their computer as running MacOS or FreeBSD, which would most of them pick?
I have been running *NIX type OSes for 17years starting with VMS on a microvax, basically because I like things that work. Linux seems to like the followthe same combination of requirements. *BSDs tend to have less support for the hardware in my systems than Linux and they both pale to Windows. Sheer support numbers don't mean as much to me and Linux is the happy medium.
Linus and crew have found a formula for developing a *NIX type kernel that many others have decided makes a good foundation for their OS distribution.
Re:Great! (Score:5, Informative)
He's admitting he's as failable as the next guy - the gist of what he's saying is that popping out of the woodwork and saying "hey, check this neat feature" isn't going to get your patch accepted into his kernel tree.
I highly doubt that any of the BSD maintainers would accept a patch either. It goes back to whether the trust is there, and evidently these guys don't hold Linus's trust.
Not much controversial here.
Comparison of Linux and BSD development process (Score:5, Funny)
BSD: Patches accepted based on what will run on the MrCoffee port
Linux: Patches to support new hardware added quickly
BSD: That better be an ISA network card...
Linux: VM changes cause instability in "stable" kernel branch
BSD: VM is old and slow, but you can use punchcards as swap. Isn't that neat?
Linux: It's for people who like to tinker
BSD: It's for people who think Debian-stable is too bleeding edge
Re:Comparison of Linux and BSD development process (Score:2)
Re:Great! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Great! (Score:5, Funny)
int main () {
printf ("Hello, World\n");
return 0;
}
Please send me patches, thanks.
Reject this! :) (Score:2, Funny)
< printf ("Hello, World\n");
---
> kprintf ("Hello, World\n");
Re:Great! (Score:5, Funny)
Portability fix, standards compliance:
Re:Great! (Score:5, Insightful)
When we have many tree's with one or two people making decisions each, its much more orginized than 20 or 30 people throwing large amounts of crap into one tree, and alot of stuff gets lost in the mess. Pull the tree that has the features you want, if it lacks one feature that you absolutly need from teh other tree, there are patches to use to get it in there.
I think having one good tree is nice. (Score:3, Funny)
Your tree, his tree, her tree... (Score:2, Funny)
-FF
(If you don't get that, do us all a favor and moderate something else.)
Re:Great! (Score:2)
Re:Great! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Great! (Score:5, Insightful)
It isn't "the official tree" - it's "the Linus tree". If you don't like it, use Alan's tree, or any of the dozens of others out there.
They do. Subscribe to the LKML [kernel.org] and post it there. Pretty well all of the important developers of the kernel (most trees) frequent it. Ok then - we have two VMs - Riks and Andreas's. Since everyone's supposed to get equal input and nobody is supposed to control the kernel - we're supposed to have both of them in play?Would you like to write the code that keeps them separate depending on which box I fill with an 'X' in menuconfig? What about all the other aspects of the kernel where we have two, five, ten, or a hundred different patches that all do the same thing? I don't know about you, but I don't really fancy downloading a 500MB Bzip2-ball of kernel source. HDDs and bandwidth may be cheap, but come on, there are limits.
So in short, if you don't like the way Linus manages his tree - branch. Take the entire code base of any of the trees you'd like as a starting point and implement your anarchist's paradise. Let me know when it becomes stable and I'll give it a whirl.
Re:Great! (Score:5, Insightful)
No. Almost all open source projects have one person or a small group in charge. Why would this be "against the whole idea"? You're just as free to make your own changes on your own darned computer, no matter how many people are in charge of however many "official" trees. The so-called "official" trees exist merely for the convenience of those who don't want to bother to roll their own each day, and the people in charge of those "official" trees are only in charge because they've earned the trust of those who use their trees.
Shouldn't everyone have input of equal value?
No. This is a meritocracy, not a democracy. The people in charge end up in charge because they've proven themselves by the quality of their work. Remember, an "official tree" only remains "official" as long as people are willing to call it that and treat it as that. "Official tree" in open-source terms is a de-facto label, not a de-jure one.
Or to put it another way, only input of high value is valued highly.
Any more silly questions?
Re:Great! (Score:2)
it has to do with empowered and unencumbered individuals, which shares traits with some views of democracy.
the whining socialist view of democracy that tries to hold everyone back to the level of the lowest doesn't have much to do with the open source way.
Re:Great! (Score:2)
Shouldn't everyone have input of equal value?
Then again, a certain popular linux site also has 'super-users' who control everything. I guesse the open-source world is full of contradictions.
Open-source is about giving users access to the source code of software. It's about empowering USERS. It's not about some leftist social movement, as MicroSoft would like people to think.
Re:Patches? We don' need no steenking Patches! (Score:3, Insightful)
That's the point of his post... you want an "offcial" policy? Grab the source, start your own tree and convince that what you are doing is better than what anybody else is doing.... if what you're doing *is* better, folks will come around to your way of seeing things. If they don't, you have a version that makes YOU hapy. Which is probably jsut as good, if not better.
Re:Patches? We don' need no steenking Patches! (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, because I was looking for something that was, for lack of a better term, less arbitrary.
Sure Linus does not dictate what each distro has to include, but he is a very influential force, and his statement is pretty much an endorsement of petty personal favoritism.
I am not in the operating system business. I write applications. I would just as soon NOT have to worry about whether a particular user has a particular patch in 'his personal tree' or not. That is just additional support headaches from my standpoint.
Re:Patches? We don' need no steenking Patches! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Hey! Wait a minute! (Score:2, Funny)
Linus being grammatically correct. (Score:5, Insightful)
Kinda like the way the word 'day' can either mean the entire 24-hour period, or just the part when the Sun is above the horizon, but 'night' only means the part when it's below. Except that a 'fortnight' includes both parts.... Bad example.
Besides, one of the people who Linus trusts and maintains a tree that Linus specifically mentioned, is -aa, which is Andrea Arcangeli. Now, how can anything that includes someone named 'Andrea' be considered 'sexist'?
Re:Linus being grammatically correct. (Score:3, Informative)
Errr... Just for the record, Andrea Arcangeli [e-mind.com] is a guy.
Re:This is not 'Open Source' as it should be. (Score:3, Interesting)
However, in this case, there is: Linus. I fully agree that you can't include every patch supplied by every developer out there, but his trackrecord clearly shows that he refuses patches for other reasons than crappy coding. (read: political reasons)."
This IS Open Source. open SOurce does NOT mean that coders must accept all the code that they get offered. Do you have any idea what it would be like is GNOME, KDE, the Kernel etc. etc. had to accept all the code some l33t h4x0r gave them? It would be a disaster!
This is Linus'es tree. He get's to decide what goes in and what doesn't. But, because this is open source, others can make a copy of his tree and add whatever they want in to it. But they have exactly ZERO power to force their code in to Linus'es tree!
This really is no different from ReiserFS. It was used by SuSE and other for a long time in their kernels before it became part of Linus'es tree. Same thing will happen with LKCD. Vendors will make it part of their kernels, and it will be merged (propably) in 2.7-tree.
You want LKCD? Download the latest Linus kernel (2.5.46?) and apply the patch. Problem solved.
Re:This is not 'Open Source' as it should be. (Score:3, Insightful)