I don’t doubt that people on all sides have made mis-steps, but from the outside it mostly just seems like Kent doesn’t want to play by the rules (despite having been given years of patience).
I don’t doubt that people on all sides have made mis-steps, but from the outside it mostly just seems like Kent doesn’t want to play by the rules (despite having been given years of patience).
I agree that the kernel community can be a hostile environment.
Though I’d argue that people _have_ tried to explain things to Kent, multiple times. At least a few have been calm, respectful attempts.
Sadly, Kent responds to everything in an email except the key part that is being pointed out to him (usually his behavior). Or deflects by going on the attack. And generally refuses to apologise.
Behaviour sounds like the least important part of code contributions. I smell overpowered, should've-been-a-kindergarten-teacher code of conduct person overreach.
Example of eye-rolling post, above:
> Sadly, Kent responds to everything in an email except the key part that is being pointed out to him (usually his behavior). Or deflects by going on the attack. And generally refuses to apologise.
And there's an email thread linked somewhere here where a CoC member repeatedly replies to Kent's emails with demands for a formal apology. All of this soft, subtle stuff adds up to an impression in people's heads, even though the main output of these projects should be highly complex software, and not bike-shedding email mediation.