I'm a few days late to the conversation, and this will probably fly under the radar, but here's my two cents.

I'll start by saying that I believe Linus was justified in the intention of his response, but not the execution of it. Linus, like it or not, is one of the lead maintainers (if not THE lead maintainer) of one of the most used pieces of software in the world - the Linux kernel - and is responsible for how well it works. If one of the other maintainers screws up, it's his job to make sure that (a) it gets fixed and (b) it doesn't happen again. This is the intention of his response - informing a maintainer that they screwed up, how they screwed up, and not to let it happen again.

Now, I think the most important thing to take away from both Linus' response and "What It's Like To Be Ridiculed For Open Sourcing A Project" is the relationship of the abuser to the abusee.

First, in Linus' case, Mauro is a volunteer and working under Linus, for all intents and purposes. Do I think Linus is justified in his response? No - his response is overwhelmingly immature for a professional. But I do believe that his response is expected; Linus is not exactly known for his tact and kindheartedness. I also believe that it is Linus' responsibility to keep those working under him aligned to the goals and values of the project, especially a project as far reaching as the Linux kernel. It's up to Mauro to learn from his mistakes or pack up and go home. Sure, it's abusive, but Linus and Mauro are not spouses.

In Heather Arthur's case however, the relationship is that of peers. The way her and her project were treated are downright despicable, especially in a community that is normally so constructive and welcoming. What happened here is completely opposite of Linus' response; this is not a supervisor chastising his underling for a poor job, these are fellow developers baselessly bullying another for publishing code that was useful to her. Heather was not forcing this project on anyone, nor did she claim it was better than anything else; it was merely useful to her and wanted to share it.

Here's the thing though: we don't tolerate "shitty, mean behavior" in programming communities. In Linus' case, most of us have simply accepted him for who he is: an immature, obscene, yet brilliant developer. We put up with him only because of the impact he has had and is continuing to have on computing as we know it. However, he is an outlier - any one else who acts as mean-spirited and childish as he does is immediately called out. Look at the outcry from Heather's blog post and the immediate apologies by the perpetrators. As a community, we almost unanimously frown upon "shitty, mean behavior".

Just because it happens, doesn't mean we tolerate it. The internet is full of immature, self-righteous, sarcastic, arrogant, elitist, and/or antagonistic assholes, and as we grow larger as a community we will see more of them. But that doesn't mean we support it. I love the programming community because of how open, constructive, sharing, supportive, and welcoming it is to newcomers and existing members alike. The thing that stands out to me, though, isn't the aforementioned assholes; it's how we respond to them that matters.