Re: [PATCH] Revert "MAINTAINERS: Remove some entries due to various compliance requirements."

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi there,

Not a maintainer, but I have made several bug reports using this email address. At least 1 reasonably-sized patch is also currently under review in the networking mailing list, along with people from several American corporations, so hopefully you won't automatically assume this email came from a "Russian troll" account.

Ok. With that out of the way, if you still want to bother reading, here's why, in the most un-provocative tone possible, why your comments _completely_ miss the point why people are upset:

On 10/23/24 1:45 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
Ok, lots of Russian trolls out and about. >
It's entirely clear why the change was done, it's not getting
reverted, and using multiple random anonymous accounts to try to
"grass root" it by Russian troll factories isn't going to change
anything.

Yes. Everybody who has more than 1 brain cell knows, in general, "why". The point was never to ask for the obvious response.

People are upset because no reference to _exactly which compliance requirement_ resulted in the removal of these maintainers. No open-source project can live outside of a political entity, but that is not the reason why "obviously" can be used to write off such a change.

Even just stating "we were contacted by <...> but details are under NDA" is a **much** better response than "due to various compliance requirements". No one is saying the LF or the Linux kernel should be outside of politics. That's impossible. But it _is_ possible to run the project based on _transparency_ and _honesty_ instead of "why can't you see the obvious".

And FYI for the actual innocent bystanders who aren't troll farm
accounts - the "various compliance requirements" are not just a US
thing.

Again -- are you under any sort of NDA not to even refer to a list of these countries?

If you haven't heard of Russian sanctions yet, you should try to read
the news some day.  And by "news", I don't mean Russian
state-sponsored spam.

Before calling out community members who raised legit concerns about procedural transparency, maybe it is worth doing a quick fact-check. There are a lot of suspicious looking `.ru` emails in this thread, but they are not who first raised the concern. The revert patch was sent out by someone at aosc.io. Look up who they actually are -- and before you assume "state-sponsored spam" just because of the language of the website, maybe you can also spend more than 1 second to check where the website is even actually located.

As to sending me a revert patch - please use whatever mush you call
brains. I'm Finnish. Did you think I'd be *supporting* Russian
aggression? Apparently it's not just lack of real news, it's lack of
history knowledge too.

I hope that either this comment wasn't written by the real Linus Torvalds, or that Linus was not under his best judgement when this email was sent. Because just like anyone who reads the news would know about Russian aggression, anyone who knows anything about politics should also be able to understand that individuals and their states are different concepts.

If these maintainers are associated with the Russian state, this should be cited as the reason for their removal. And you know what? Most people wouldn't have any problem with it. And then you can say "we are not supporting Russian aggression" with confidence. But this is **not** what was done.

I seriously hope that Linus Torvalds would have known better.

Thanks,
Peter.




[Index of Archives]     [Linux SPI]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux ARM (vger)]     [Linux ARM MSM]     [Linux Omap]     [Linux Arm]     [Linux Tegra]     [Fedora ARM]     [Linux for Samsung SOC]     [eCos]     [Linux Fastboot]     [Gcc Help]     [Git]     [DCCP]     [IETF Announce]     [Security]     [Linux MIPS]     [Yosemite Campsites]

  Powered by Linux