Linux kernel has a new code of conduct (CoC). Linus Torvalds took a break from Linux kernel development just 30 minutes after signing this code of conduct. And since the writer of this code of conduct has had a controversial past, it has now become a point of heated discussion. With all the politics involved, not many people are happy with this new CoC.
If you do not know already, Linux creator Linus Torvalds has apologized for his past behavior and has taken a temporary break from Linux kernel development to improve his behavior.
The new code of conduct for Linux kernel development
Linux kernel developers have a code of conduct. It’s not like they didn’t have a code before, but the previous code of conflict is now replaced by this new code of conduct to “help make the kernel community a welcoming environment to participate in.”
“In the interest of fostering an open and welcoming environment, we as contributors and maintainers pledge to making participation in our project and our community a harassment-free experience for everyone, regardless of age, body size, disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, level of experience, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.”
You can read the entire code of conduct on this commit page.
Was Linus Torvalds forced to apologize and take a break?
The code of conduct was signed off by Linus Torvalds and Greg Kroah-Hartman (kind of second-in-command after Torvalds). Dan Williams of Intel and Chris Mason from Facebook were some of the other signees.
If I have read through the timeline correctly, half an hour after signing this code of conduct, Torvalds sent a mail apologizing for his past behavior. He also announced taking a temporary break to improve upon his behavior.
But at this point some people started reading between the lines, with a special attention to this line from his mail:
This week 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.
This particular line could be read as if he was coerced into apologizing and taking a break because of the new code of conduct. Though it could also be a precautionary measure to prevent Torvalds from violating the newly created code of conduct.
The controversy around Contributor Covenant creator Coraline Ada Ehmke
The Linux code of conduct is based on the Contributor Covenant, version 1.4. Contributor Covenant has been adopted by hundreds of open source projects. Eclipse, Angular, Ruby, Kubernetes are some of the many adopters of Contributor Covenant.
Contributor Covenant has been created by Coraline Ada Ehmke, a software developer, an open-source advocate, and an LGBT activist. She has been instrumental in promoting diversity in
Coraline has also been vocal about her stance against meritocracy. The Latin word meritocracy originally refers to a “system under which advancement within the system turns on “merits”, like intelligence, credentials, and education.” But activists like Coraline believe that meritocracy is a negative system where the worth of an individual is measured not by their humanity, but solely by their intellectual output.
Remember that Linus Torvalds has repeatedly said that he cares about the code, not the person who writes it.
Coraline has had a
Coraline was neither in the discussion nor was she a contributor to the Opal project. But as an LGBT activist, she took it to herself and demanded that Elia be removed from the Opal Project for his ‘views against trans people’. A lengthy and heated discussion took place on Opal’s GitHub repository. Coraline and her supporters, who never contributed to Opal, tried to coerce the moderators into removing Elia, a core contributor of the project.
While Elia wasn’t removed from the project, Opal project maintainers agreed to put up a code of conduct in place. And this code of conduct was nothing else but Coraline’s famed Contributor Covenant that she had pitched to the maintainers herself.
But the story didn’t end here. The Contributor Covenant was then modified and a new clause added in order to get to Elia. The new clause widened the scope of conduct in public spaces. This malicious change was spotted by the maintainers and they edited the clause. Opal eventually got rid of the Contributor Covenant and put in place its own guideline.
This is a classic example of how a few offended people, who never contributed a single line of code to the project, tried to oust its core contributor.
People’s reaction on Linux Code of Conduct and Torvalds’ apology
As soon as Linux code of conduct and Torvalds’ apology went public, Social Media and forums were rife with rumors and speculations. While many people appreciated this new development, there were some who saw a conspiracy by SJW infiltrating Linux.
A sarcastic tweet by Caroline only fueled the fire.
I can’t wait for the mass exodus from Linux now that it’s been infiltrated by SJWs. Hahahah pic.twitter.com/eFeY6r4ENv
— Coraline Ada Ehmke (@CoralineAda) September 16, 2018
In the wake of the Linux CoC controversy, Coraline openly said that the Contributor Covenant code of conduct is a political document. This did not go down well with the people who want the political stuff out of the open source projects.
Some people are saying that the Contributor Covenant is a political document, and they’re right.
— Coraline Ada Ehmke (@CoralineAda) September 16, 2018
Nick Monroe, a freelance journalist, dig up the past of Coraline in order to validate his claim that there is more to Linux CoC than meets the eye. You can go by the entire thread if you want.
Alright. You've seen this a million times before. It's a code of conduct blah blah blah
— Nick Monroe (@nickmon1112) September 17, 2018
that has social justice baked right into it. blah blah blah.https://t.co/KuQqeriYeJ
But something is different about this. pic.twitter.com/8NUL2K1gu2
Nick wasn’t the only one to disapprove of the new Linux CoC. The SJW involvement led to more skepticism.
I guess the big news in Linux today is that the Linux kernel is now governed by a Code of Conduct and a “post meritocracy” world view.
— Mark Kern (@Grummz) September 17, 2018
In principle these CoCs look great. In practice they are abused tools to hunt people SJWs don’t like. And they don’t like a lot of people.
While there were many who appreciated Torvalds’ apology, there were a few who blamed Torvalds’ attitude:
Am I the only one who thinks Linus Torvalds attitude for decades was a prime contributors to how many of the condescending, rudes, jerks in Linux and open source "communities" behaved? I've never once felt welcomed into the Linux community as a new user.
— Jonathan Frappier (@jfrappier) September 17, 2018
And some were simply not amused with his apology:
Oh look, an abusive OSS maintainer finally admitted, after *decades* of abusive and toxic behavior, that his behavior *might* be an issue.
— Kelly Ellis (@justkelly_ok) September 17, 2018
And a bunch of people I follow are tripping all over themselves to give him cookies for that. 🙄🙄🙄
The entire Torvalds apology episode has raised a genuine concern ;)
Do we have to put "I don't/do forgive Linus Torvalds" in our bio now?
— Verónica. (@maria_fibonacci) September 17, 2018
Jokes apart, the genuine concern was raised by Sharp, who had quit Linux Kernel development in 2015 due to the ‘toxic community’.
The real test here is whether the community that built Linus up and protected his right to be verbally abusive will change. Linus not only needs to change himself, but the Linux kernel community needs to change as well. https://t.co/EG5KO43416
— Sage Sharp (@_sagesharp_) September 17, 2018
What do you think of Linux Code of Conduct?
If you ask my opinion, I do think that a Code of Conduct is the need of the time. It guides people in behaving in a respectable way and helps create a positive environment for all kind of people irrespective of their race, ethnicity, religion, nationality and political views (both left and right).
What are your views on the entire episode? Do you think the CoC will help Linux kernel development? Or will it deteriorate with the involvement of anti-meritocracy SJWs?
We don’t have a code of conduct at It’s FOSS but let’s keep the discussion civil :)
I don’t see why anybody engaged in an online technical project needs to know anything about the other team members’ sexual proclivities or preferred pronouns. In any such project I’ve worked on, people signed all their communications with their names, and were referred to that way. If I was making a code of conduct for such a project, it would be “Mind your own business and keep your sexual preferences to yourself”. That would solve the problems at hand.
An organization lacking a code of conduct or strict guidelines for its members’ behavior isn’t an organization I would join if given a choice. I like to know beforehand the kind of shitshow I’m engaging. Does the organization in question weaponize meritocracy for petty reasons such as “I don’t like you or your opinions.” or does it seek out and promote skilled labor and good ideas? Does the organization’s leaders graciously accept critique or are they prone to meltdowns and bullying? Well, ultimately, it matters not if the organization doesn’t enforce its ethics. It seems that Torvalds had a god-complex because he was beyond reproach and the previous CoC was a joke.
That aside, I’m suspicious of Coraline’s motivations because of her gender politics. She wants power and she won’t or can’t get it the “traditional” way. Someone dismisses her code because it’s objectively bad or simply not what’s needed?—“Well by gosh by golly it must be because I’m trans!” and “Truly, everyone’s an asshole but me!” Biases do exist. All large groupings of people have cliques. Meritocracy has its limits but is by no means bad in itself. But that’s not what this is about. It’s about the acquisition of power, privilege, and prestige for oneself at the expense of others designated as “problematic”.
Coraline craves privilege as the drunkard craves alcohol. Her previous attack on meritocracy isn’t about the contradictions therein—she seeks to undermine the authority of her enemies through “progressive” action. It benefits no one but herself and those most like her. Coraline isn’t for free and open source software if she thinks that restricting its distribution and who uses it is acceptable. In fact, her actions are antidemocratic. Her modus operandi is as reactionary as the alt-right’s and but ensconced in language more appealing to the ear. There is a word used in certain circles of the left for people like her: “pseudo-left.”
The problem however isn’t the language used, the ambiguous wording, or the possible motives driving the author to act. It’s the conceit behind the license that provokes my ire. Coraline believes that she’s “changing the system” by authoring tripe that accomplishes nothing but division and chaos within the community. Indeed, the Hippocratic License, even if worded better, can’t and won’t stop organizations like ICE from using our creations or prevent companies from working with them. A supplier will appear whether open source or not.