Re: [Ksummit-discuss] Call to Action Re: [PATCH 0/7] Code of Conduct: Fix some wording, and add an interpretation document
Date: Thu Oct 25 2018 - 17:15:07 EST
On Wed, Oct 24 2018, Josh Triplett wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 07:26:06AM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 21 2018, Josh Triplett wrote:
>> > On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 08:20:11AM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
>> >> I call on you, Greg:
>> >> - to abandon this divisive attempt to impose a "Code of Conduct"
>> >> - to revert 8a104f8b5867c68
>> >> - to return to your core competence of building a great team around
>> >> a great kernel
>> >> #Isupportreversion
>> >> I call on the community to consider what *does* need to be said, about
>> >> conduct, to people outside the community and who have recently joined.
>> >> What is the document that you would have liked to have read as you were
>> >> starting out? It is all too long ago for me to remember clearly, and so
>> >> much has changed.
>> > The document I would have liked to have read when starting out is
>> > currently checked into the source tree in
>> > Documentation/process/code-of-conduct.rst .
>> I'm curious - what would you have gained by reading that document?
> I would have then had rather less of a pervasive feeling of "if I make
> even a single mistake I get made an example of in ways that will feed
> people's quotes files for years to come".
Thanks for your reply. Certainly feeling safe is important, and having
clear statements that the community values and promotes psychological
safety is valuable.
The old "code of conflict" said
If however, anyone feels personally abused, threatened, or otherwise
uncomfortable due to this process, that is not acceptable.
would you have not found this a strong enough statement to ward off that
In the current code, would The "Our Pledge" section have been
sufficient, or do you think the other sections would have actually
> for more on the benefits of that.
Thanks for the link.
Description: PGP signature