From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932208AbWGYIdT (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Jul 2006 04:33:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932205AbWGYIdN (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Jul 2006 04:33:13 -0400 Received: from vsmtp2.tin.it ([212.216.176.222]:49626 "EHLO vsmtp2.tin.it") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932192AbWGYIdL (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Jul 2006 04:33:11 -0400 Message-ID: <3679.192.167.206.189.1153816389.squirrel@darkstar.linuxpratico.net> In-Reply-To: <200607250757.00643.a1426z@gawab.com> References: <200607241857.38889.a1426z@gawab.com> <200607250757.00643.a1426z@gawab.com> Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 10:33:09 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Re: the ' 'official' point of view' expressed by kernelnewbies.org From: "Luigi Genoni" To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.5.1 [CVS] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Please, I'm starting to me quite upset of all those references to impoliteness. Every time on lkml someone talks about reiserFS/reiser4, immediatelly after espressing his technical point (if he has something to say, of course), then he feels he needs to add that developers should be polite. i.e he feels he needs to take the distance from reiserFs developers attitude towards other kernel maintainers. I am replying to this mail because it is the last one I am reading, but the previos mails from all the other who discussed this topic are really tipical about this attitude. I follow lkml since years, I know very well what happened, but do you think that people are going to change, and their attitude is going to improve, if in every post they read, they fell to be marked as "the bad guy ready to flame everyone who disagrees with him in the worst impolite way"? If you want thing to go better, please avoid those considerations and be happy just focusing on the technical arguments. Luigi Genoni On Tue, July 25, 2006 06:57, Al Boldi wrote: > BTW, this does not mean that impoliteness should be rewarded, on the > contrary, impoliteness has no place anywhere, and should just be ignored, > even if the content is worth its salt. >