Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3
Hi Guys,
I initially thought these patches were a joke. But I guess they are
not. I suppose 2018 is the year everything became offensive.
Could we avoid the s/fuck/hug/g though? I have nothing against
re-wording this stuff to remove the curse word, but it should at least
make sense.
What's going to happen is someone is a newbie is going to see a comment
like "We found an mark in the idr at the right wd, but it's not the
mark we were told to remove. eparis seriously hugged up somewhere",
probably google the term as they are unfamiliar with it, find out it's
an alias for "fucked" and if they are sensitive get offended anyway.
On Sat, 1 Dec 2018 at 08:20, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>
> Hi Jon,
>
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:15 PM Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> > On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 14:12:19 -0800
> > Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> >
> > > As a maintainer myself (and based on somewhat disturbed feedback from
> > > other maintainers) I can only make the conclusion that nobody knows what
> > > the responsibility part here means.
> > >
> > > I would interpret, if I read it like at lawyer at least, that even for
> > > existing code you would need to do the changes postmorterm.
> > >
> > > Is this wrong interpretation? Should I conclude that I made a mistake
> > > by reading the CoC and trying to understand what it *actually* says?
> > > After this discussion, I can say that I understand it less than before.
> >
> > Have you read Documentation/process/code-of-conduct-interpretation.rst?
> > As has been pointed out, it contains a clear answer to how things should
> > be interpreted here.
>
> Indeed:
>
> | Contributions submitted for the kernel should use appropriate language.
> | Content that already exists predating the Code of Conduct will not be
> | addressed now as a violation.
>
> However:
>
> | Inappropriate language can be seen as a
> | bug, though; such bugs will be fixed more quickly if any interested
> | parties submit patches to that effect.
>
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>
> Geert
>
> --
> Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 --
> ge...@linux-m68k.org
>
> In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
> when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like
> that.
> -- Linus Torvalds
Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 08:39:01PM +, Abuse wrote: > On Friday, 30 November 2018 20:35:07 GMT David Miller wrote: > > From: Jens Axboe > > Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 13:12:26 -0700 > > > > > On 11/30/18 12:56 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote: > > >> On Fri, 30 Nov 2018, Kees Cook wrote: > > >> > > >>> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27 AM Jarkko Sakkinen > > >>> wrote: > > > > In order to comply with the CoC, replace with a hug. > > >> > > >> I hope this is some kind of joke. How would anyone get offended by > > >> reading > > >> technical comments? This is all beyond me... > > > > > > Agree, this is insanity. > > > > And even worse it is censorship. > > > > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > > I assume I will now be barred. > > Thank you for taking the opportunity to practice free speech in the always so welcoming and inclusive on-line world :-) Now I'll just have to find my notebook and write this prose down so that I'll never forget it. Thanks again. /Jarkko
Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 08:39:01PM +, Abuse wrote: > On Friday, 30 November 2018 20:35:07 GMT David Miller wrote: > > From: Jens Axboe > > Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 13:12:26 -0700 > > > > > On 11/30/18 12:56 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote: > > >> On Fri, 30 Nov 2018, Kees Cook wrote: > > >> > > >>> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27 AM Jarkko Sakkinen > > >>> wrote: > > > > In order to comply with the CoC, replace with a hug. > > >> > > >> I hope this is some kind of joke. How would anyone get offended by > > >> reading > > >> technical comments? This is all beyond me... > > > > > > Agree, this is insanity. > > > > And even worse it is censorship. > > > > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > Fuck > > I assume I will now be barred. > > Thank you for taking the opportunity to practice free speech in the always so welcoming and inclusive on-line world :-) Now I'll just have to find my notebook and write this prose down so that I'll never forget it. Thanks again. /Jarkko
Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 03:14:59PM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 14:12:19 -0800 > Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > As a maintainer myself (and based on somewhat disturbed feedback from > > other maintainers) I can only make the conclusion that nobody knows what > > the responsibility part here means. > > > > I would interpret, if I read it like at lawyer at least, that even for > > existing code you would need to do the changes postmorterm. > > > > Is this wrong interpretation? Should I conclude that I made a mistake > > by reading the CoC and trying to understand what it *actually* says? > > After this discussion, I can say that I understand it less than before. > > Have you read Documentation/process/code-of-conduct-interpretation.rst? > As has been pointed out, it contains a clear answer to how things should > be interpreted here. Ugh, was not aware that there two documents. Yeah, definitely sheds light. Why the documents could not be merged to single common sense code of conduct? /Jarkko
Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 03:14:59PM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 14:12:19 -0800 > Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > As a maintainer myself (and based on somewhat disturbed feedback from > > other maintainers) I can only make the conclusion that nobody knows what > > the responsibility part here means. > > > > I would interpret, if I read it like at lawyer at least, that even for > > existing code you would need to do the changes postmorterm. > > > > Is this wrong interpretation? Should I conclude that I made a mistake > > by reading the CoC and trying to understand what it *actually* says? > > After this discussion, I can say that I understand it less than before. > > Have you read Documentation/process/code-of-conduct-interpretation.rst? > As has been pointed out, it contains a clear answer to how things should > be interpreted here. Ugh, was not aware that there two documents. Yeah, definitely sheds light. Why the documents could not be merged to single common sense code of conduct? /Jarkko
Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 08:57:09PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > As a non-native speaker, I find both replacements difficult to understand. > While many of the original comments are easy to grasp for +7 year olds > who were never taught English, but are exposed to modern global ways > of communication... So you say that a non-native speaker could drop the f-word by accident? Like when you go to a grocery store in an English speaking country, instead of saying hello to the counter lady, you say the f-word by accident? Does not compute... /Jarkko
Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 08:57:09PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > As a non-native speaker, I find both replacements difficult to understand. > While many of the original comments are easy to grasp for +7 year olds > who were never taught English, but are exposed to modern global ways > of communication... So you say that a non-native speaker could drop the f-word by accident? Like when you go to a grocery store in an English speaking country, instead of saying hello to the counter lady, you say the f-word by accident? Does not compute... /Jarkko
Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3
[ Cleared out the Cc list to something more reasonable ] On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 20:45:57 + Abuse wrote: > On Friday, 30 November 2018 20:42:28 GMT David Miller wrote: > > From: Abuse > > Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 20:39:01 + > > > > > I assume I will now be barred. > > > > Perhaps, but not because you said fuck. It would be because you're > > intentionally creating a disturbance on the list and making it more > > difficult for developers to get their work done and intentionally > > creating a distraction and a hostile environment for the discussion at > > hand. > > > > That would not be censorship. > > > > There is a big difference. > > > > I would beg to differ, as would calling the removal of the word 'Fuck' > censorship. Technically that is censorship. The only reason to remove the word is because some people find it unnecessary, where as other people find it appropriate. Removing language people find unnecessary or offensive is censorship. That said. I don't always find censorship a bad thing. Removing language that was an attack to someone's race, religion, sexuality, is also censorship. But I'm fine with that kind of censorship. Censoring words that someone simply finds distasteful, I honestly don't really care, because some people find "heck" distasteful too. I would also agree with you that David blocking you for creating a disturbance is also censorship. But that's also a kind of censorship I would prefer to have. (Blocking spam is censorship too). -- Steve > > It's a word I find is totally unnecessary in normal public usage. >
Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3
[ Cleared out the Cc list to something more reasonable ] On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 20:45:57 + Abuse wrote: > On Friday, 30 November 2018 20:42:28 GMT David Miller wrote: > > From: Abuse > > Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 20:39:01 + > > > > > I assume I will now be barred. > > > > Perhaps, but not because you said fuck. It would be because you're > > intentionally creating a disturbance on the list and making it more > > difficult for developers to get their work done and intentionally > > creating a distraction and a hostile environment for the discussion at > > hand. > > > > That would not be censorship. > > > > There is a big difference. > > > > I would beg to differ, as would calling the removal of the word 'Fuck' > censorship. Technically that is censorship. The only reason to remove the word is because some people find it unnecessary, where as other people find it appropriate. Removing language people find unnecessary or offensive is censorship. That said. I don't always find censorship a bad thing. Removing language that was an attack to someone's race, religion, sexuality, is also censorship. But I'm fine with that kind of censorship. Censoring words that someone simply finds distasteful, I honestly don't really care, because some people find "heck" distasteful too. I would also agree with you that David blocking you for creating a disturbance is also censorship. But that's also a kind of censorship I would prefer to have. (Blocking spam is censorship too). -- Steve > > It's a word I find is totally unnecessary in normal public usage. >
Re: Fwd: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:48:24AM -0800, Kees Cook wrote: > Better yet, since it's only 17 files, how about doing context-specific > changes? "This API is terrible" I think we should only use "good" with selected operators like !, ++, -- E.g. "This API is !good++" Suggested-by: George Orwell A.
Re: Fwd: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:48:24AM -0800, Kees Cook wrote: > Better yet, since it's only 17 files, how about doing context-specific > changes? "This API is terrible" I think we should only use "good" with selected operators like !, ++, -- E.g. "This API is !good++" Suggested-by: George Orwell A.
Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3
(reducing CC, as per later advice)
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 8:40 PM Kees Cook wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27 AM Jarkko Sakkinen
> wrote:
> >
> > In order to comply with the CoC, replace with a hug.
>
> Heh. I support the replacement of the stronger language, but I find
> "hug", "hugged", and "hugging" to be very weird replacements. Can we
> bikeshed this to "heck", "hecked", and "hecking" (or "heckin" to
> follow true Doggo meme style).
>
> "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.
As a non-native speaker, I find both replacements difficult to understand.
While many of the original comments are easy to grasp for +7 year olds
who were never taught English, but are exposed to modern global ways
of communication...
> 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?
The last one is not appropriate, as it's shooting at the person, not at the
code (cfr. "You did a bad thing" vs. "you're a bad kid").
If the comments no longer apply, it's better to remove them.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- ge...@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3
(reducing CC, as per later advice)
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 8:40 PM Kees Cook wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27 AM Jarkko Sakkinen
> wrote:
> >
> > In order to comply with the CoC, replace with a hug.
>
> Heh. I support the replacement of the stronger language, but I find
> "hug", "hugged", and "hugging" to be very weird replacements. Can we
> bikeshed this to "heck", "hecked", and "hecking" (or "heckin" to
> follow true Doggo meme style).
>
> "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.
As a non-native speaker, I find both replacements difficult to understand.
While many of the original comments are easy to grasp for +7 year olds
who were never taught English, but are exposed to modern global ways
of communication...
> 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?
The last one is not appropriate, as it's shooting at the person, not at the
code (cfr. "You did a bad thing" vs. "you're a bad kid").
If the comments no longer apply, it's better to remove them.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- ge...@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Fwd: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3
[resend with CCs dropped so it'll actually get delivered to lkml...] On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27 AM Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > In order to comply with the CoC, replace with a hug. Heh. I support the replacement of the stronger language, but I find "hug", "hugged", and "hugging" to be very weird replacements. Can we bikeshed this to "heck", "hecked", and "hecking" (or "heckin" to follow true Doggo meme style). "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. 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? -Kees > > Jarkko Sakkinen (15): > MIPS: replace with a hug > Documentation: replace with a hug > drm/nouveau: replace with a hug > m68k: replace with a hug > parisc: replace with a hug > cpufreq: replace with a hug > ide: replace with a hug > media: replace with a hug > mtd: replace with a hug > net/sunhme: replace with a hug > scsi: replace with a hug > inotify: replace with a hug > irq: replace with a hug > lib: replace with a hug > net: replace with a hug > > Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst | 2 +- > arch/m68k/include/asm/sun3ints.h | 2 +- > arch/mips/pci/ops-bridge.c| 24 +-- > arch/mips/sgi-ip22/ip22-setup.c | 2 +- > arch/parisc/kernel/sys_parisc.c | 2 +- > drivers/cpufreq/powernow-k7.c | 2 +- > .../gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c | 2 +- > .../nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/macros.fuc| 2 +- > drivers/ide/cmd640.c | 2 +- > drivers/media/i2c/bt819.c | 8 --- > drivers/mtd/mtd_blkdevs.c | 2 +- > drivers/net/ethernet/sun/sunhme.c | 4 ++-- > drivers/scsi/qlogicpti.h | 2 +- > fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c | 2 +- > kernel/irq/timings.c | 2 +- > lib/vsprintf.c| 2 +- > net/core/skbuff.c | 2 +- > 17 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-) > > -- > 2.19.1 > -- Kees Cook
Fwd: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3
[resend with CCs dropped so it'll actually get delivered to lkml...] On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27 AM Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > In order to comply with the CoC, replace with a hug. Heh. I support the replacement of the stronger language, but I find "hug", "hugged", and "hugging" to be very weird replacements. Can we bikeshed this to "heck", "hecked", and "hecking" (or "heckin" to follow true Doggo meme style). "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. 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? -Kees > > Jarkko Sakkinen (15): > MIPS: replace with a hug > Documentation: replace with a hug > drm/nouveau: replace with a hug > m68k: replace with a hug > parisc: replace with a hug > cpufreq: replace with a hug > ide: replace with a hug > media: replace with a hug > mtd: replace with a hug > net/sunhme: replace with a hug > scsi: replace with a hug > inotify: replace with a hug > irq: replace with a hug > lib: replace with a hug > net: replace with a hug > > Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst | 2 +- > arch/m68k/include/asm/sun3ints.h | 2 +- > arch/mips/pci/ops-bridge.c| 24 +-- > arch/mips/sgi-ip22/ip22-setup.c | 2 +- > arch/parisc/kernel/sys_parisc.c | 2 +- > drivers/cpufreq/powernow-k7.c | 2 +- > .../gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c | 2 +- > .../nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/macros.fuc| 2 +- > drivers/ide/cmd640.c | 2 +- > drivers/media/i2c/bt819.c | 8 --- > drivers/mtd/mtd_blkdevs.c | 2 +- > drivers/net/ethernet/sun/sunhme.c | 4 ++-- > drivers/scsi/qlogicpti.h | 2 +- > fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c | 2 +- > kernel/irq/timings.c | 2 +- > lib/vsprintf.c| 2 +- > net/core/skbuff.c | 2 +- > 17 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-) > > -- > 2.19.1 > -- Kees Cook
