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 :)
Torvalds essentially fell to his knees to worship at the altar of the SJW & published the Linux #CoC. Hilarity ensues bc contributors are revoking their code. #DemocratsHateAmerica
There are two separate issues here: civility and meritocracy.
Should people be nice to each other? Of course. Can people be forced to be nice to each other? Probably not. At best, a code of conduct will smooth over some of the worse abuses. At worst, it will be weaponized by the “perpetually offended” to chase off individuals who don’t toe the proper political lines, regardless of their coding abilities.
Meritocracy, however, is absolutely essential to the continued success of Linux. Anyone who thinks diversity for diversity’s sake is going to improve the codebase is an ideologue.
Surprise, surprise. This Coraline person reeks of ideology.
I do mostly agree, but to be fair, Coraline has a point, even if the way she expresses it is horribly off-putting–meritocracy is great when it is actually a meritocracy, but too often people are excluded under the pretense of meritocracy when merit isn’t really the motivating factor. ‘Meritocracy’, too, is often invoked as an ideological tool. It’s easy to say certain people hold power, influence or group involvement because of their merit, but sometimes group dynamics lead to some people being excluded from even developing, displaying or exercising those merits. If you’re discouraged from contributing at all, how are you even supposed to have any merits?
“too often people are excluded under the pretense of meritocracy”
“Meritocracy’, too, is often invoked as an ideological tool.”
I don’t think so, at least not so readily. When politics hides behind meritocracy such as you describe, that’s not meritocracy, just politics wearing a mask.
I think the key distinction is this: meritocracy has no goals, but is outwardly ordered toward, and its parameters defined by, the goals of the project, whatever the particular project happens to be. If it’s a coding project, the currency of merit is coding skills. In a hospital it’s medical knowledge. In an orchestra, musical talent.
Diversity, by contrast, is self-referential. It doesn’t care about coding skill or medical knowledge or musical talent. The goal and metric of diversity is simply more diversity, and the goals of the project become at best tangential, at worst, completely irrelevant in a diversity-driven universe.
This is why it’s easy for me to see diversity as an ideology; it’s a closed, self-referential, unfalsifiable system — in other words, it’s ideological.
I can see what you’re saying. Coding skill is coding skill and it doesn’t really matter who you are or what you look like. But I don’t think it always works out like that in practice. I’m sure most people have encountered instances in male-dominated tech communities where female members have either been either talked down to or received overwhelming sexual attention from other members. I can see how it would be hard to participate as a minority in those communities, and I can imagine it might be hard for them to hear that coding is meritocratic when they’ve essentially been culturally or socially excluded or treated differently. Absolute meritocracy is an ideal which is nearly impossible to attain. Sure, we can hide behind gender-ambiguous user names, but sometimes that’s not possible, nor desirable.
And yes, the push for diversity is ideological, but so is any ethical value when it comes down to it, including the belief that meritocracy is something to be valued, though I must say that meritocracy is a particularly worthwhile ideology. I think inclusiveness is a better goal than diversity, and I think that’s what the code of conduct is aimed more towards. I can’t imagine there will be any forceful push to encourage a certain number of people from certain demographics. But making sure people aren’t bullied or intimidated out of Linux before they can even begin is worthwhile, imo.
Most organisations have codes of conduct pertaining to harassment and being respectful. As Linux becomes more and more mainstream, which is currently happening, adopting a code of conduct is probably a good idea and will only help Linux to gain further mainstream adoption. The stereotype of Linux users (and programmers in general) being bitter nerds with poor social skills still exists to a certain extent, and there’s at least a kernel of truth to it. Computers have traditionally been a refuge for many people on the aspergers/autism spectrum, and a lot of people in these spheres have little tact or capacity to relate to others in a respectful way. I think this probably applies to Torvalds himself, based on his own many accounts of his tactlessness and lack of empathy. Having some soft guidelines which are as general and gentle as “don’t harass people” and “be respectful” will just ensure that the greatest number of people, from all backgrounds, will be able to work together as efficiently and harmoniously as possible.
And it’s not like this is some formal for profit organisation. I seriously doubt there will be any mandates for diversity quotas or sanctions for minor indiscretions, because it isn’t likely that anyone’s going to try to sue Linux. There’s also no brand image to maintain, because it’s still a very loose-knit community in which individuals are just contributors, not personal representatives. Diversity quotas don’t make sense anyway, because everyone is free to contribute to Linux. There is no limit.
Sorry, I sort of diverged from meritocracy without realising. But overall, I don’t think Linux is in any danger of becoming less meritocratic from the code of conduct, and, in fact, I think it will just serve as a catalyst to introduce and maintain even more talent.
Reaching a consensus with an idiot makes you an idiot, too.
…seriously? What, has that Coraline idiot never taken a basic psychology class? You can’t force people to be nice. Toxicity and meritocracy are not synonymous, and criticizing someone is not being toxic. The kernel belongs to Torvalds, and he is an asshole. You know that going in—don’t whine about it later. This code of conduct crap is one more effort to “make everyone special.” I expect participation awards will be forthcoming shortly?
It’s an adult world. If you can’t hang, grow up.