g****t
发帖数: 31659 | 1 本来似乎没有扯到UMN这个范围。12月20号华人教授clarify了这问题。似乎已经settle
down了。
但是不知为何这Aditya Pakki又搞了一轮垃圾代码提交。然后被指出问题，他全是各种
buzz
words,
似乎想要谋求政治正确。
回复的这个哥们急了，还扯上了C语言。然后办了@umn。LoL
On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 02:56:27AM -0500, Aditya Pakki wrote:
> Greg,
>
> I respectfully ask you to cease and desist from making wild accusations
> that are bordering on slander.
>
> These patches were sent as part of a new static analyzer that I wrote and
> it's sensitivity is obviously not great. I sent patches on the hopes to
get
> feedback. We are not experts in the linux kernel and repeatedly making
> these statements is disgusting to hear.
>
> Obviously, it is a wrong step but your preconceived biases are so strong
> that you make allegations without merit nor give us any benefit of doubt.
>
> I will not be sending any more patches due to the attitude that is not
only
> unwelcome but also intimidating to newbies and non experts.
You, and your group, have publicly admitted to sending known-buggy
patches to see how the kernel community would react to them, and
published a paper based on that work.
Now you submit a new series of obviously-incorrect patches again, so
what am I supposed to think of such a thing?
They obviously were _NOT_ created by a static analysis tool that is of
any intelligence, as they all are the result of totally different
patterns, and all of which are obviously not even fixing anything at
all. So what am I supposed to think here, other than that you and your
group are continuing to experiment on the kernel community developers by
sending such nonsense patches?
When submitting patches created by a tool, everyone who does so submits
them with wording like "found by tool XXX, we are not sure if this is
correct or not, please advise." which is NOT what you did here at all.
You were not asking for help, you were claiming that these were
legitimate fixes, which you KNEW to be incorrect.
A few minutes with anyone with the semblance of knowledge of C can see
that your submissions do NOT do anything at all, so to think that a tool
created them, and then that you thought they were a valid "fix" is
totally negligent on your part, not ours. You are the one at fault, it
is not our job to be the test subjects of a tool you create.
Our community welcomes developers who wish to help and enhance Linux.
That is NOT what you are attempting to do here, so please do not try to
frame it that way.
Our community does not appreciate being experimented on, and being
"tested" by submitting known patches that are either do nothing on
purpose, or introduce bugs on purpose. If you wish to do work like
this, I suggest you find a different community to run your experiments
on, you are not welcome here.
Because of this, I will now have to ban all future contributions from
your University and rip out your previous contributions, as they were
obviously submitted in bad-faith with the intent to cause problems.
*plonk*
greg k-h | c*******v
发帖数: 2599 | 2 哈哈，我没说错吧。想要用政治正确来指责这些老油条,是严重的问题。
Aditya Pakki的email风格被HN上的印度人指出了:
"
His email reminds me the way politicians behaves in my country (India): play
victim and start dunking.
"
settle
【在 g****t 的大作中提到】
: 本来似乎没有扯到UMN这个范围。12月20号华人教授clarify了这问题。似乎已经settle
: down了。
: 但是不知为何这Aditya Pakki又搞了一轮垃圾代码提交。然后被指出问题，他全是各种
: buzz
: words,
: 似乎想要谋求政治正确。
: 回复的这个哥们急了，还扯上了C语言。然后办了@umn。LoL
: On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 02:56:27AM -0500, Aditya Pakki wrote:
: > Greg,
: >
| n******t
发帖数: 4406 | 3 烙印最後這個是無效代碼，問題是也不是惡意代碼，不讓merge 無可厚非。
問題是烙印並沒有在之前的文章署名，GH這個點上跳出來拿以前的事情罵別人一頓無非
是自己氣不順而已，作為maintainer心態已經崩了。
不管怎麼說，因為一個research的行為去無差別封掉整個學校沒有什麼道理。
settle
【在 g****t 的大作中提到】
: 本来似乎没有扯到UMN这个范围。12月20号华人教授clarify了这问题。似乎已经settle
: down了。
: 但是不知为何这Aditya Pakki又搞了一轮垃圾代码提交。然后被指出问题，他全是各种
: buzz
: words,
: 似乎想要谋求政治正确。
: 回复的这个哥们急了，还扯上了C语言。然后办了@umn。LoL
: On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 02:56:27AM -0500, Aditya Pakki wrote:
: > Greg,
: >
| g****t
发帖数: 31659 | 4 除了email写的有bully或者吓唬人之嫌疑，第二轮这个老印没什么问题。
公平的讲，GH对第二轮这个老印很不公平。
一个教授有两个项目很常见。
我都能半小时后看出来。他们在当初那个原初环境下，应该马上可以看出来的。
但我不觉得其心态崩了。GH之决定应是有考虑的。毕竟这件事不是一天两天了。
其实很简单。GH认为是对人做实验。UMN之IRB也许认为不是。那么各走各的路就完事了。
今后@UMN不要和kernel.org发生关系即可。这个也make sense。
【在 n******t 的大作中提到】
: 烙印最後這個是無效代碼，問題是也不是惡意代碼，不讓merge 無可厚非。
: 問題是烙印並沒有在之前的文章署名，GH這個點上跳出來拿以前的事情罵別人一頓無非
: 是自己氣不順而已，作為maintainer心態已經崩了。
: 不管怎麼說，因為一個research的行為去無差別封掉整個學校沒有什麼道理。
:
: settle
| C*****l
发帖数: 1 | 5 如果真是如此，烙印应该声明他这个不是相关的研究，而不是骂GH有偏见
UMN显然不愿意被这个教授陪绑
了。
【在 g****t 的大作中提到】
: 除了email写的有bully或者吓唬人之嫌疑，第二轮这个老印没什么问题。
: 公平的讲，GH对第二轮这个老印很不公平。
: 一个教授有两个项目很常见。
: 我都能半小时后看出来。他们在当初那个原初环境下，应该马上可以看出来的。
: 但我不觉得其心态崩了。GH之决定应是有考虑的。毕竟这件事不是一天两天了。
: 其实很简单。GH认为是对人做实验。UMN之IRB也许认为不是。那么各走各的路就完事了。
: 今后@UMN不要和kernel.org发生关系即可。这个也make sense。
| n******t
发帖数: 4406 | 6 GH顯然就是偏見，問題是linux社區文化本來就如此。
Linus因為某個原因選了GH當管家，拿他愛怎樣就怎樣，就是這麼回事。
【在 C*****l 的大作中提到】
: 如果真是如此，烙印应该声明他这个不是相关的研究，而不是骂GH有偏见
: UMN显然不愿意被这个教授陪绑
:
: 了。
| C*****l
发帖数: 1 | 7 人家这个偏见事出有因，你看见emaillist不光是GH，其他maintainer也是群情激愤，
看见这个组的就像防贼一样
【在 n******t 的大作中提到】
: GH顯然就是偏見，問題是linux社區文化本來就如此。
: Linus因為某個原因選了GH當管家，拿他愛怎樣就怎樣，就是這麼回事。
| g****t
发帖数: 31659 | 8 选人都是trust第一，其他方面靠后吧。
【在 n******t 的大作中提到】
: GH顯然就是偏見，問題是linux社區文化本來就如此。
: Linus因為某個原因選了GH當管家，拿他愛怎樣就怎樣，就是這麼回事。
| n******t
发帖数: 4406 | 9 這不顯然呢？Linux是金字塔型開發模式上面吃死下面的.
Linus能選GH顯然是他的想法，同時GH下面的maitainer也是他說了算的，你這個時候不
跟着悲憤想不想混了？
【在 C*****l 的大作中提到】
: 人家这个偏见事出有因，你看见emaillist不光是GH，其他maintainer也是群情激愤，
: 看见这个组的就像防贼一样
|
|
