Crying wolf requires him to have been wrong (or lied). I think that GP was asking you for evidence of _that_, not of evidence that Linus has ranted in the past.
From memory, I can't recall a time where his ranting was not justified, but he has been wrong a couple of times. Unless I'm missing something blatant, that doesn't constitute "crying wolf" to me.
The parable of the boy crying wolf is not about lies but about desensitizing your audience to what you are saying. I've read enough of the rants to know there is very little signal to all the noise he makes.
The grsecurity stuff could be bad but I sure as hell am not gonna get my analysis from Linus. If he acted more like a grown up then maybe but he doesn't. He character assassinates and then says you are doing silly pointer arithmetic. Can just mention the pointer stuff without shouting and screaming at author of the patch.
The drama in kernel dev is a direct result of his abrasive approach. He screams and shouts so grsecurity screams and shouts. Everyone else loses. The kernel dev space needs less drama and more grown ups.
> The parable of the boy crying wolf is not about lies but about desensitizing your audience to what you are saying.
... Because the little boy was lying. If there really was a wolf every time he said there was they would consider him a brilliant scout rather than an untrustworthy source of information.
It's strange that it's necessary to explain children's parables on HN.
> The kernel dev space needs less drama and more grown ups.
I don't disagree with that, I just don't agree with saying that Linus is crying wolf. Because you don't appear to understand what it means.
The term “Crying Wolf” implies the very specific and extreme accusation of lying. Ranting, or even ranting then reversing course are very different from lying.
