* Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:

quoted text
> What we need is not 'negative reinforcement'. That is just nasty, open 
> warfare between isolated parties, expressed in a politically correct 
> way.

in more detail: any "negative reinforcement" should be on the 
_technical_ level, i.e. when changes are handled - not at the broad tree 
level.

Sure, there are exceptions, etc. - but by the time stuff goes upstream 
it's too late and we've got to fix stuff instead of trying to push back 
on each other.

by earlier integration (= linux-next) we can do the pushback much 
earlier, in a much more granular, much more technical in a much less 
personal way: "hey Ingo, your new sched-dizzy-blah patch broke stuff 
here, zap it" or "hey Dave, that socket-foo rewrite just broke things 
here, zap it".

git-revert _kind of_ makes that possible too, but people still feel too 
personal about reverts - they take it as intrusion into their subsystem 
and regard it as an attack against their competence as a maintainer.

and this is all so typical btw.: the most effective measure against 
human warfare is for people to see each other and to talk to each other.

[ That's one reason why i am so worried about mailing list isolation.
  People get more distant, they mean less to each other, work less with
  each other => Linux suffers. I do accept that for some people lkml is
  simply too noisy - but i think the cure is worse than the disease. ]

	Ingo
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/