Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 27 Feb 1999 15:01:13 -0500 (EST) | From | "Mike A. Harris" <> | Subject | Re: People need to say "no" |
| |
On Thu, 25 Feb 1999, Eric Princen wrote:
>Sorry to waste bandwidth here, but I think Robert is overstating the >omnipotence of Linus. Before I get 1001 flames for that, I'll just state >that I'm speaking in the unspeakable hypothetical here... :-)
I heavily disagree.
>If people agreed that a feature was needed and Linus was the sole person who >didn't want it in, he could be over-ruled.
No. If someone wanted that feature, they could release patches on the side that implement it, or they could even distribute a ready to go fully patched kernel. In no way does that "overrule" Linus. Anyone is free to do this, nobody is stopping them.
>I believe the GPL the way it is would allow us to just make it >our beastie an new OS (under a new name if need be)
Yes, you are more than free to fork the tree at any time you like.
>and everyone works on that leaving Linus' personal Linux to die.
That is VHU - Very Highly Unlikely (TM). Pick any feature you like. Linus says no - it is highly unlikely that any particular kernel patch that Linus rejects will be deemed by the masses to be something that should go in. In other words, there are no patches/features that are available right now that 80% of everyone out there thinks "I *HAVE* to have that - Linus is wrong". This is not likely to EVER happen either. People for the most part respect Linus's judgement, despite what a small minority of people might think, and as such, Linus will maintain his omnipotence until he decides he no longer wants the responsibility. I believe he could make arbitrary decisions like "Today Linus drops FAT filesystem from the kernel" and people would argue and complain, but if there were good enough technical reason, most people would go, "Yes, I agree", if not as peers in agreement, then as penguin followers....
Granted, the particular example I just gave is lame, and totally not going to happen, but replace my example with something else until it makes sense to you.
>Linus is the God of Linux just because we all trust him to be.
Not just because of trust. Read ESR's papers - The Cathedral and the Bazaar, etc... Linus IMHO does not make irrational decisions, and never has done so. The only way that Linux could fall, or that the Linus approved kernel could sway were if some irrational decision on Linus's part were done to the kernel, and that that change were to be contrary to what a large portion of the Linux userbase want/need in the kernel.
>He could just as easily not be.
Not likely until he decides to leave development himself.
>Please just flame me directly if you choose to. There is other more >important work to be done on the list. (My wife and I be kayaking the Grand >Canyon for three weeks in just a bit, so I won't get the flames anyway. :-)
No flames. Just some differing of opinion. ;o)
Take care, and enjoy your kayaking! TTYL
-- Mike A. Harris Linux advocate GNU advocate Computer Consultant Open Source advocate
News for nerds, stuff that matters: http://slashdot.org
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |