- Baggins ( @baggins@beehaw.org ) English10•5 hours ago
We’ll build our own Linux, with blackjack and hookers!
- Rin ( @Rin@lemm.ee ) 2•4 hours ago
Gl with thst vro
- gazter ( @gazter@aussie.zone ) 5•6 hours ago
The possibilities for naming their distro are endless…
- ReakDuck ( @ReakDuck@lemmy.ml ) 4•5 hours ago
Especially, because they can chose existing names as there is no Copyright in Russia (afaik, probably a wrong myth but idk)
- Em Adespoton ( @adespoton@lemmy.ca ) 24•11 hours ago
They haven’t been removed from the community though — just the maintainers list. Now they need someone else’s review to commit code to the kernel.
Personally, I think even maintainers should be required to have that — you can be the committer for pre-reviewed code from others, but not just be able to check anything you want in, no matter your reputation (even if you’re Linus). That way a security breach is less likely to cause havoc.
- Ephera ( @Ephera@lemmy.ml ) 7•10 hours ago
I find that difficult. Aside from code reviews, often times your job as a maintainer is:
- getting a refactor or code cleanup in while everyone’s asleep
- shuffling commits around between branches
- fixing the CI toolchain
- rolling back or repairing a broken change
- unfucking the repo
- fixing a security vulnerability
A required review slows all of these tasks to a crawl. I do agree that the kernel is important enough that it might be worth the trade-off.
But at the same, I do not feel like I could do my (non-kernel) maintainer job without direct commit access…
- tetris11 ( @tetris11@lemmy.ml ) 4•7 hours ago
This joke hasn’t aged well. I took it as is and just assumed the Dad put together a micro PC with a PS2 emulator on it, and then I stared at the article for 5 minutes looking for the punchline.