[deelowe]

But in true Linus style, he just has to take a dig at another team at the same time to balance things out.

[foresto]

To be fair, his comment was not directed at another team, but at another body of code. (Two, actually.) The context makes it not merely a dig, but constructive feedback: "Those past projects have significant flaws, and here we have an example of how to do it right." If I were an OpenVPN or IPSec developer, I think I'd swallow my pride and take this valuable opportunity to learn how to improve my work.

[viraptor]

Or specifically as whole systems with multiple implementations. There's no "IPsec" code really.

[mirimir]

Sure. But isn't it a valid dig?

[deelowe]

I don't know. I'm sure the teams working on their tools had their reasons.

[swsieber]

There are reasons to have technical debt. Having reasonable reasons don't make the technical debt any easier to fix.

I don't think Linus' comment was directed at the author, it was at the code. Whatever the reason, the code he took a dig at is messier than wireguard.

[ryanlol]

You mean, each individual member of those teams had their reasons?

[deelowe]

Not sure. I'm not on the team, but I seriously doubt their intent was to write bad software. I know before ipsec existed there was nothing, so why not thank the individuals who worked on it for pioneering the effort in the first place?

[draw_down]

I think it's okay for him to be frank about things. We all don't like when he bites someone's head off; fine, that's not what he's doing here.

We're really at a point where people would prefer to discuss his tone rather than the content of what he says, even here.

[deelowe]

That's because he can't make a single comment on a thread without at least throwing a least a couple of backhanded insults in there.