On Mon, 15 Jul 2013 20:17:30 -0400 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, 2013-07-15 at 16:15 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > > > One thing you should keep in mind in your discussion is what can happen > > if people get too polite with each other. > > > > I have seen this happen at two large companies I worked for. Early on, flames > > are acceptable and expected as response to someone publishing bad code which > > breaks everything for everyone. Then, at some point, it is not acceptable > > anymore to flame, and one is expected to be polite and friendly at all times. > > "Your code breaks the build for every platform. Would you please kindly > > consider fixing it ?" > > Result is that code quality suffers, to the point where images don't even > > build anymore. > > > > I hope the Linux kernel never gets into that stage. To avoid that, > > I am willing to be cursed at by Linus if I am the responsible party. > > Didn't Jim Zemlin show some research where there were two groups: > > One that did a bunch of brain storming where no idea was a bad idea > > The other required you to defend your idea while the others bashed it. > > The results always showed that the second group not only did a better > job, but also faster and more efficient. > > I'm afraid if we worry too much about politeness, we will fall into that > first group. > Surely there is an enormous difference between being required to defend your position against rational and forceful argument, and being required to defend it against irrelevant name calling. NeilBrown
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature