Open Source is awful in many ways, and people should be aware of this

Replies

• 

  Abhishek Rawal

  systemd, upstart. let's not talk about it.Let's not talk about Mir or X or Wayland either. Let's not talk about Gtk to Qt - a strange journey [linux.conf.au 2014] - YouTube either . I am done debating about everything controversial in forums like Phoronix. One thing I have learn is that everyone has their opinion & you can't change it.
  
  However, it seems like Lennart is pointing out same thing which Sarah Sharp mentioned some months before in LKML, isn't it ? (strong language use in LKML)
  But it seems like things went worse for Lennart. I mean Hitman, Hate mails, murder songs, what the fuck! ?
  
  BTW, I would like to know is #-Link-Snipped-# = Lennart Poettering ? 😨
• 

  avii

  I have been contributing to open source for many years and I would like to add my perspective.
  
  I agree with Lennart's sentiments, however I wouldn't say all of open source groups are like that. Linux community is certainly one, but not all.
  
  Years ago, when I first submitted my patch to linux, I was insulted and humiliated. But tbh, my patch was in really bad quality and not upto standards of linux. Though I did not encounter Linus or got bashing from him, but others were definitely snarky.
  
  Did it stop me? No. Did I learn something? Yes, awful lot. I also learnt that there are trolls on internet and how to avoid such people.
  
  Were the maintainers of community wrong in anyway? certainly not, my code was horrible and probably I deserved it. That was my first patch and 4 months later I submitted another and it was accepted without much fuss. (please note that these were not huge contributions, in LOC or features. I was baby back then 😛)
  
  Sometimes Linus goes overboard and rants and abuses very badly. Here's a LKML: Linus Torvalds: Re: Regression - /proc/kmsg does not (always) block for 1-byte reads:
  Of course, I'd also suggest that whoever was the genius who thought it
  was a good idea to read things ONE F*CKING BYTE AT A TIME with system
  calls for each byte should be retroactively aborted. Who the f*ck does
  idiotic things like that? How did they noty die as babies, considering
  that they were likely too stupid to find a tit to suck on?
  
  I will keep this open to debate and whether Linus is right or not. And he deserve to be going like that, after all Linux is his baby.
  
  Later I moved to Fedora and community was good. And even Gentoo also. (I haven't submitted any patches to these). Some of good and pleasant communities, where I am active and make contributions: Django core, Node.js, Meteor. These people have really nice guys. (and I have made some pretty nice contribs ;-))
  
  Any new community, which is like Linux? Bitcoin. Filled with people worse than Linux. I was called curry smelling nigger (a derogatory and racist term used for Indians). I love Bitcoin, the way it functions and future lies with it. That's the only reason I am sticking it to it.
  
  And also I started learning Go and Bitcoin-Go community has really nice people, so I am learning a lot.
  
  TLDR; Linux community is indeed horrible, people often get personal attacks to death threats, but I wouldn't say all open source communities are like that.
• 

  avii

  Abhishek Rawal

  However, it seems like Lennart is pointing out same thing which Sarah Sharp mentioned some months before in LKML, isn't it ? (strong language use in LKML)
  But it seems like things went worse for Lennart. I mean Hitman, Hate mails, murder songs, what the fuck! ?

  Sarah Sharp's rant was mostly for Linus and not in open source in general. She was pissed how he was ranting and why people would still support him.
  
  

  Abhishek Rawal

  BTW, I would like to know is #-Link-Snipped-# = Lennart Poettering ? 😨

  Nope, I am a desi guy 😁
  
  and also Lennart is an awesome coder.
• 

  Abhishek Rawal

  avii

  TLDR; Linux community is indeed horrible, people often get personal attacks to death threats, but I wouldn't say all open source communities are like that.

  Exactly! As long as we're collaborating/developing something not so major project, it's all cool.All you'll get is praise from regular users. Once you get into some hardcore projects that affects the Linux ecosystem like DS protocols i.e Wayland - Mir Or init system like Upstart - systemd or even in Linux Kernel, shit changes and getting bashed is just obvious if you're not technically dope.
  
  Though, Opensource is just fun.
• 

  avii

  And even after years of attacks, he still kept going. Thats like one in 1000, in lkml xD
  
  respect.
• 

  Abhishek Rawal

  Quoting article written by Aaron Seigo (Well known KDE & Plasma dev) :
  
  

  While reading the morning free software news and blog rolls, I came across #-Link-Snipped-#. He blames communities and kernel developers (Linus Torvalds specifically, in fact) and laments how he has been on the receiving end of so much negative behavior over the years. I'm glad he's become self-aware of these things because Lennart has been part of the problem he finds himself facing down, part of the bravado-based approach too often seen in free software.
  
  It is not acceptable to threaten people's safety and only marginally more acceptable to "just" be verbally horrible to someone in the day-to-day of co-creation that is free software. Lennart is in the right to call out people who do this and communities who support that kind of behavior.
  
  That said, many of us in the community who are visible and do not shy away from rocking the boat when it makes sense to do so do not receive that kind of response from people. I certainly get my "fair share" of trolls, insults and generally poorly behaved individuals but Lennart's experience is foreign to me and, I suspect, many others in similar positions. The difference? Lennart's approach to dealing with people in the community which has often been less than constructive and open. This does not excuse the people who have been pointing their vitriol and inexcusably bad behavior at Lennart, not does it place the blame for their actions on Lennart as we are each personally responsible for our actions and words. It is, however, useful for us to look at how these maelstroms are created with honesty and accuracy.
  
  This is the heart of the matter for me: we co-create this environment. None of us are unempowered or simply "acted upon". We may not always like the results, but they are undeniably things we make together, which is why it is referred to as "community". Trying not to overgeneralize too much, I've experienced four types of paths in the free software world each of which result in a different sort of environment. Only one is the one Lennart speaks out against, though two of the other three are not very useful either.
  Nobody moves, nobody gets hurt
  There are many people who simply don't interact with "the community". They write code, they put out useful technology and interact as little as possible. Sometimes this is because they are just very private or shy people who enjoy a low-key existence and don't feel compelled to do more than this. Others are hoping to avoid the possible negative response that can come from putting yourself out there; we could call this "harm avoidance". This is a very safe approach for the individual and nothing particularly wrong with it, but it does have its negative consequences.
  
  Without communication and togetherness, it is very hard to generate the environment in which software can be effectively co-created. The result are software projects, which may otherwise be great, that are underappreciated, underused and which receive far fewer contributions than they ought to. It isn't good for the software, and this is particularly tragic when the motivation is harm-avoidance.
  
  Getting people and projects out of this mode requires offering them an easy, welcoming and rewarding environment. In other words, not the one Lennart finds himself in. It also requires others reaching out to these people as it is far easier to move beyond "nobody moves, nobody gets hurt" with a little positive encouragement and friendship.
  Everybody be nice, or else!
  Some communities have adopted the stance that the most important thing in the creation of technology is for everyone to be nice to each other at all times ... or else. This is usually motivated by all the right intentions, though I've seen it used at least once quite non-innocently. Of course everyone should be "nice" and everyone should have the opportunity to work in a "nice" environment. The problem is found in the "or else".
  
  It is really very difficult to discuss issues of design (technical, visual, interaction, etc.) without it being at times uncomfortable: the topic is people's effort and work. They tend to care deeply about their creative efforts and people can have wildly different ideas on what makes for the best approach. This does not make the discussions wrong, it just makes them potentially uncomfortable. Discomfort, however, is not something to be avoided at all costs. Many, if not most, growth experiences in life are accompanied by some discomfort, usually because they involve doing something we aren't familiar with, or good at (yet).
  
  It also diverts the focus from making technology to, well, being nice. The point of a software project is to create software. Being nice is something that ought to happen in the course of that, not the other way around. Communities and individuals who fall into this inversion of priorities make it harder, even impossible, to take on the necessary difficult conversations and tasks. Even worse, sometimes the "be nice" stick becomes a means to simply bully people who they don't agree with; I've seen people set up scenarios where they will stick to their position and anyone who disagrees is "not being nice". It's a sickness, and it happens. This results in the software in question usually failing to deliver rigorous results as the difficult conversations are no longer given room.
  
  Getting people and projects out of this mode requires convincing people of the safety of disagreement and the usefulness of it. That means points of contention must be handled with civility and the rewards that come out of hard work is clearly demonstrated rather than allowed to sink into the background. Usually this is a matter of personal growth of the people in the project, which is never a bad thing either.
  Bad Boyz Club
  This is the scenario that Lennart finds himself in, where people learn to behave badly because it delivers results and because their role models do it as well. There is not much that I probably need to say here as Lennart did a good job of casting light on it. It's destructive, it's chases people away who have better sensibilities and it is damn hard to fix once a community sinks into it. The best remedy is to simply avoid ever getting there in the first place. Those that enter your community dragging this kind of behavior behind them ought be shown the door (after given a suitable chance to moderate their own actions).
  
  It does share something in common with "everybody be nice, or else!", though: both patterns distract from the actual act of creating great technology together. The focus increasingly becomes on interpersonal behavior rather than making technology. Again, this inversion of priorities, where the behavior ought to be in support of the primary focus of making great technology, takes a toll on the software in question.
  Technology Co-creation
  This is the healthy path where people focus on technology creation first and foremost and the one we would all do well to get as many free software communities on. In these kinds of environments, social interactions are something that happen as a happy by-product of making great technology together. Requiring responsible adult behavior (including being good to each other) is something that happens in support of that. Very little else gets in the way of the task at hand of making software. Difficult discussions are made easier as the focus is on the end result (the software) rather than everyone sitting on the edge of their seat hoping nothing bad happens. None of it is personal, positively or negatively, and this allows healthy projects which in turn create excellent social groups to be a part of.
  
  Thankfully this is where most of the free software projects I've experienced sit. Most live in this sensible realm that recognizes that the goal is to make awesome technology in an ethical manner. The result is some of the best software we have anywhere and some great communities to go with them. Period.
  
  So while I agree with Lennart that the "bad boyz club" mode is deadly for free software and unjust on the personal level, I disagree with Lennart's claim that free software as a whole is a "sick place to be in" because, quite simply, most of free software doesn't operate as a "bad boyz club".
  
  He is absolutely right that the "bad boyz clubs" need addressing and that they are failing to serve their community members and users; but thankfully it is not the majority case. Yes, even in technology-focused co-creative communities there are occasional instances of people behaving badly, but it's the exception rather than the norm. Thankfully.

  Source : #-Link-Snipped-#
• 

  Abhishek Rawal

  And something even better (or worse ?) : #-Link-Snipped-#