<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:dc="https://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="https://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:foaf="https://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/" xmlns:og="https://ogp.me/ns#" xmlns:rdfs="https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#" xmlns:schema="https://schema.org/" xmlns:sioc="https://rdfs.org/sioc/ns#" xmlns:sioct="https://rdfs.org/sioc/types#" xmlns:skos="https://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#" xmlns:xsd="https://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" version="2.0" xml:base="https://www.linuxjournal.com/tag/code-conduct">
  <channel>
    <title>Code of Conduct</title>
    <link>https://www.linuxjournal.com/tag/code-conduct</link>
    <description/>
    <language>en</language>
    
    <item>
  <title>Removing Profanity from the Source Tree</title>
  <link>https://www.linuxjournal.com/content/removing-profanity-source-tree</link>
  <description>  &lt;div data-history-node-id="1340421" class="layout layout--onecol"&gt;
    &lt;div class="layout__region layout__region--content"&gt;
      
            &lt;div class="field field--name-field-node-image field--type-image field--label-hidden field--item"&gt;  &lt;img src="https://www.linuxjournal.com/sites/default/files/nodeimage/story/bigstock-Handwriting-Text-Writing-Code--236244091_0.jpg" width="800" height="533" alt="Linux kernel code of conduct" typeof="foaf:Image" class="img-responsive" /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
      
            &lt;div class="field field--name-node-author field--type-ds field--label-hidden field--item"&gt;by &lt;a title="View user profile." href="https://www.linuxjournal.com/users/zack-brown" lang="" about="https://www.linuxjournal.com/users/zack-brown" typeof="schema:Person" property="schema:name" datatype="" xml:lang=""&gt;Zack Brown&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
      
            &lt;div class="field field--name-body field--type-text-with-summary field--label-hidden field--item"&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Warning: this article contains profanity.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Linus Torvalds&lt;/strong&gt; recently stepped away from kernel development
temporarily in order to think about how to be less harsh with
developers in certain situations. Simultaneous with his departure
was a patch introducing a new &lt;strong&gt;Code of Conduct&lt;/strong&gt; into the kernel
source tree. The effects of this are beginning to be felt.
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Jarkko Sakkinen&lt;/strong&gt; recently posted a patch to change a kernel comment
containing the word "fuck" to use the word "hug" instead. So the
code comment, "Wirzenius wrote this portably, Torvalds fucked it
up" would become "Wirzenius wrote this portably, Torvalds hugged
it up".
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Steven Rostedt&lt;/strong&gt; replied to this, saying that the code in question
had changed so much that the original comment was out of date, and
it should just be removed entirely. He said, "that will be an accurate
change with or without CoC."
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Jonathan Corbet&lt;/strong&gt; remarked, "I'd much rather see either deletion or
a rewrite over bleeping out words that somebody might not like."
And &lt;strong&gt;Jiri Kosina&lt;/strong&gt; agreed, saying, "turning comments into something
that often doesn't make sense to anybody at all is hardly productive."
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Sergey Senozhatsky&lt;/strong&gt; pointed out that Linus was the author of the
original self-deprecating comment. He asked, "Linus has made a
comment, in his own words, about his own code. Why would anyone be
offended by this?"
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;
And &lt;strong&gt;Tobin C. Harding&lt;/strong&gt; remarked of the original code comment, "This
is my favourite comment to date in the kernel source tree. Surely
there are still some people working on the kernel that do so for
fun. I actually laughed out loud when I first stumbled upon this
file."
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;
In a different thread, &lt;strong&gt;Kees Cook&lt;/strong&gt; said he agreed with removing "fuck"
from the source tree, but felt that the word "hug" was not a good
replacement, since it didn't maintain the original meaning. He said:
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
"This API is hugged" doesn't make any sense to me. "This API is
hecked" is better, or at least funnier (to me). "Hug this interface"
similarly makes no sense, but "Heck this interface" seems better.
"Don't touch my hecking code", "What the heck were they thinking?"
etc...."hug" is odd.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;

&lt;p&gt;
He added, "Better yet, since it's only 17 files, how about doing
context-specific changes? 'This API is terrible', 'Hateful interface',
'Don't touch my freakin' code', 'What in the world were they
thinking?' etc.?"
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
      
            &lt;div class="field field--name-node-link field--type-ds field--label-hidden field--item"&gt;  &lt;a href="https://www.linuxjournal.com/content/removing-profanity-source-tree" hreflang="en"&gt;Go to Full Article&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
      
    &lt;/div&gt;
  &lt;/div&gt;

</description>
  <pubDate>Tue, 12 Feb 2019 12:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Zack Brown</dc:creator>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">1340421 at https://www.linuxjournal.com</guid>
    </item>
<item>
  <title>Linus' Behavior and the Kernel Development Community</title>
  <link>https://www.linuxjournal.com/content/linus-behavior-and-kernel-development-community</link>
  <description>  &lt;div data-history-node-id="1340182" class="layout layout--onecol"&gt;
    &lt;div class="layout__region layout__region--content"&gt;
      
            &lt;div class="field field--name-field-node-image field--type-image field--label-hidden field--item"&gt;  &lt;img src="https://www.linuxjournal.com/sites/default/files/nodeimage/story/bigstock-Handwriting-Text-Writing-Code--236244091.jpg" width="800" height="533" alt="""" typeof="foaf:Image" class="img-responsive" /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
      
            &lt;div class="field field--name-node-author field--type-ds field--label-hidden field--item"&gt;by &lt;a title="View user profile." href="https://www.linuxjournal.com/users/zack-brown" lang="" about="https://www.linuxjournal.com/users/zack-brown" typeof="schema:Person" property="schema:name" datatype="" xml:lang=""&gt;Zack Brown&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
      
            &lt;div class="field field--name-body field--type-text-with-summary field--label-hidden field--item"&gt;&lt;p&gt;
&lt;cite&gt;WARNING: This article contains profanity.&lt;/cite&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;
On September 16, 2018, &lt;strong&gt;Linus Torvalds&lt;/strong&gt; released the
&lt;strong&gt;4.19-rc4&lt;/strong&gt; version of the
kernel, and he also announced he was taking a break from Linux development in
order to consider his own behavior and to come up with a better approach
to kernel development. This was partly inspired by his realization that he
wasn't looking forward to the &lt;strong&gt;Kernel Summit&lt;/strong&gt; event, and he said that "it wasn't
actually funny or a good sign that I was hoping to just skip the yearly
kernel summit entirely."
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;
He also wrote that it was partly inspired when:
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;
...people in our community confronted me
about my lifetime of not understanding emotions. My flippant attacks in
emails have been both unprofessional and uncalled for. Especially at times
when I made it personal. In my quest for a better patch, this made sense
to me. I know now this was not OK and I am truly sorry.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;

&lt;p&gt;
So he said, "I am going to take time off and get some assistance on how to
understand people's emotions and respond appropriately."
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;
He compared the situation to the kind of "pain points" the Linux kernel
project has experienced on a technical level in the past, like moving from
tarballs to &lt;strong&gt;BitKeeper&lt;/strong&gt;, and from BitKeeper to
&lt;strong&gt;git&lt;/strong&gt;. And he remarked that "We
haven't had that kind of pain-point in about a decade. But this week felt
like that kind of pain point to me."
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;
He also added, by way of clarification, that "This is not some kind of 'I'm
burnt out, I need to just go away' break. I'm not feeling like I don't
want to continue maintaining Linux. Quite the reverse. I very much *do*
want to continue to do this project that I've been working on for almost
three decades."
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;
That was the last post Linus sent to the mailing list, up to the time of
this writing. However, he and several other kernel developers signed off on
a patch to the kernel tree, incorporating a new Code of Conduct policy.
It's fairly boilerplate—basically, don't be mean, don't discriminate,
violations will be investigated, and appropriate measures taken.
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;
It's not a new idea. Long ago, &lt;strong&gt;Richard Stallman&lt;/strong&gt; used to troll the mailing
list trying to start an argument about "Linux" vs. "GNU/Linux", until the
mailing list maintainers threatened to ban him if he kept it up. They
phrased it as a general rule, not unlike a code of conduct.
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;
There's been a wide range of responses to Linus' announcement and to the
Code of Conduct itself. Some felt that Linus' earlier behavior had been
community-strengthening, encouraging people to respond as equals and duke
it out with Linus on the issues they cared about.
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;
Some felt that Linus was taking a really wonderful step, seeking feedback
and
reflecting on the issues, and they in turn offered their own insights and
assistance.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
      
            &lt;div class="field field--name-node-link field--type-ds field--label-hidden field--item"&gt;  &lt;a href="https://www.linuxjournal.com/content/linus-behavior-and-kernel-development-community" hreflang="en"&gt;Go to Full Article&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
      
    &lt;/div&gt;
  &lt;/div&gt;

</description>
  <pubDate>Tue, 09 Oct 2018 13:08:08 +0000</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Zack Brown</dc:creator>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">1340182 at https://www.linuxjournal.com</guid>
    </item>

  </channel>
</rss>
