Keynote: Greg Kroah-Hartman (Linux Foundation) - "I Don't Want Your Code"

"They don't need or even want your help" There was in fact a talk given by Greg Kroah-Hartman, one Linux's lead maintainers, about development for the Linux kernel which he titled "I Don't Want Your Code" . [VIDEO]

>implies that the requester's time is less valuable than the project maintainer's It is. In large projects, there are relatively few maintainers responsible for evaluating the requests, reports and code from lots of people. They're scarce resources. [VIDEO] [LINK]

> maybe it's time to have sub-maintainers to whom such tasks could be delegated They already have subsystem maintainers. The result was an even faster process. [VIDEO]

[VIDEO] > If you're hired to do this stuff, you're on your own, you better know what you're doing. Huawei pays professional developers to contribute to the kernel. Of course they should be held to a higher standard. They should be working on something substantial, not fixing minor problems. Surely there are far more important things to work on. Failing to prioritize important issues coupled with incentives for kernel contribution means they are putting in minimum effort for maximum personal gain at the expense of maintainers.

> it's not the publishing but the use which is proscribed - same applies for engineering Exactly. I think there should be an exception for free and open source software though. We have lots of free software designed to be used by people. I don't think these programmers should be held liable. Many of them are amateurs and volunteers. The chilling effect would simply be too great. I'm reminded of Greg Kroah-Hartman's talk about kernel contributors. [VIDEO] > My goal, of me, as a developer and to make Linux succeed, is to help [amateurs, unknown individuals] out. > If you're hired to do this stuff, you're on your own and you better know what you're doing. I think he's right. At the time, roughly 20% of the kernel was done by individuals. That work is extremely valuable yet it is different from professional work. It should be treated differently. with a lot more compassion and understanding. On the other hand, it is fine to expect professionals to be disciplined. > A social-media site operated by an amateur in the bedroom being paid nothing and using only open-source software would still be liable under any sensible and realistic regulation. Yeah, I agree. That's not just software anymore, that's a service. > e.g. create a non-profit, and pay the non-profit which pays the programmer. So long as the programmer is one step removed from you it's fine. It doesn't matter how indirect it is. The important fact is the programmer is getting paid for their work. That makes it professional

Because then consumers get hardware that works out of the box on Linux. That's how good corporations contribute. [VIDEO]

[VIDEO] for a video version of this talk One funny bit about the talk, which isn’t mentioned in the slides, is that he actually gave the talk at Linaro (the very same company who were called out in the slides as a case study of submitting a particularly bad set of patches)

Because it leads to straight up better products and companies that don't upstream the drivers get outcompeted by the ones that do. Greg Kroah-Hartman explains it: [VIDEO]