similar to: Asterisk Community Code of Conduct

> On Oct 13, 2015, at 2:45 PM, Philip Reames via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > +1 to the general idea of a CoC > > A couple of specific thoughts: > > 1) It would have been nice for this not to appeared out of thin air. In an ideal world, a previous update would have mentioned ongoing thought and research in this area. > Some back story here. I

On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 1:50 PM Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > > - Is this trying to change how the community behaves? I think the > resounding > > answer is no, this is very much meant to formalize the existing extremely > > polite and respectful behavior that the LLVM community has had for many > > years. > > This is crucial IMHO

Greetings all, First off, thanks to everyone who contributed to the initial discussion thread. Judging by the responses from that thread, there seems to pretty broad interest in pursuing this. There also seem to be a few concerns. =] I'm including an updated draft based on the feedback, and I'll also try to break down the major points I've seen of discussion. Sorry for the long email,

On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 2:02 AM Bill Kelly via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Tanya Lattner wrote: > >> On Oct 13, 2015, at 10:23 AM, Bill Kelly via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> > >> Renato Golin via llvm-dev wrote: > >>> On 13 October 2015 at 17:16, Kuperstein, Michael M via llvm-dev >

Am 13.10.2015 um 12:52 schrieb Renato Golin via llvm-dev: > On 13 October 2015 at 02:42, Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> On behalf of the board of the LLVM Foundation, I’d like to start the process >> of introducing a formal code of conduct for the community. > > Hi Chandler, > > I agree we need such guidelines, and I truly

+1 for this TL;DR suggestion - you can guarantee most people would read < 7 short bullet points. Cheers, -Neil. On 06/05/16 15:53, Arnaud Allard de Grandmaison via llvm-dev wrote: > For what it's worth, I think this is an improved version of the CoC, > and I'm OK with it. Thanks to Chandler and all those who have been > working on it. > > It's not perfect ---

I like the NCoC approach, actually. I think the community can manage itself quite well. Echoing a prior response---if this community really needs a set of rules, then it has already deteriorated. We are not there and it doesn't look like we are going in that direction. The FreeBSD CoC also looks reasonable, and if any CoC is needed, I find this one more appealing. -Krzysztof On

On 5/5/2016 4:19 PM, Tanya Lattner via llvm-dev wrote: > Having a code of conduct like this is just as bad as having no code of conduct at all. It trivializes the importance of a code of conduct and its pretty much impossible to enforce. Code of conduct should reflect the community standards, not define them. These standards come from the minds of the members of the community. A CoC that

On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 2:55 AM David Chisnall via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hi Tanya, > > On 18/02/2020 00:56, Tanya Lattner wrote: > > I understand not everyone wants to use Google docs which was why I gave > an option to reply via email as well. My intention on using Google docs is > really just based on my experience using it for docs that span

Greetings everyone, On behalf of the board of the LLVM Foundation, I’d like to start the process of introducing a formal code of conduct for the community. For a long time, various members of the community have been enforcing basic reasonable and respectful behavior, but to an outsider this may not be obvious. A public code of conduct advertises the behavior we expect of community members and

On 13 October 2015 at 17:09, Rafael Espíndola <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > I assume the end objective of such a policy is to have more effective > communications, so it would be nice to have some examples to avoid it > instead hampering communications by pushing unnecessary political > correctness. +2!!! > * Small, on the side jokes are OK if people are not

----- Original Message ----- > From: "James Y Knight via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > To: "Chandler Carruth" <chandlerc at llvm.org> > Cc: "llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2015 6:08:08 PM > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] RFC: Introducing an LLVM Community Code of Conduct > ... > >

On 10/14/2015 01:25 PM, Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev wrote: > On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 1:02 PM Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org > <mailto:renato.golin at linaro.org>> wrote: > > On 14 October 2015 at 20:35, Tanya Lattner via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: > > Related specifically

> On Feb 17, 2020, at 10:06 AM, David Chisnall via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hi Tanya, > > Is there a reason for hosting things for review on Google Docs? We currently have both Phabricator and GitHub that work for review of any text-based format. When I click on a Google Docs link, I am asked to agree to a privacy policy that is very vague and I am

Joachim, I think we pretty strongly disagree here. On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 12:39 PM Joachim Durchholz via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Am 13.10.2015 um 20:17 schrieb Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev: > > > > This is a *specific* thing that is called out time and again as important > > to having an effective code of conduct in all of the research I have

> Your report will still be kept confidential exactly as above, but also > feel free to (anonymously if needed) email conduct at llvm.org if needed. I have slight reservations towards this. A general conduct email is good, but there are cases where you would like to contact individuals. This is for example, when the report goes against a member of the conduct team itself or the LLVM core

Let me skip most of the CoC comments which I largely agree with, both in terms of the proposed CoC and the need for having one in first place. On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 09:38:57PM +0200, Joachim Durchholz via llvm-dev wrote: > Actually I'm not yet convinced that LLVM really needs a CoC. If people have > been reluctant to join, I'm really, really sure it's not due to lack of CoC

> On Oct 13, 2015, at 10:23 AM, Bill Kelly via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Renato Golin via llvm-dev wrote: >> On 13 October 2015 at 17:16, Kuperstein, Michael M via llvm-dev >> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >>> The FreeBSD CoC is, IMHO, much better in this respect ( https://www.freebsd.org/internal/code-of-conduct.html ).

On 14 October 2015 at 20:35, Tanya Lattner via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Related specifically to the developers meeting, we are growing quite > rapidly. For the past few years, we have been increasing our attendance from > 50 at the start to now over 350 attendees. With this many people (and many > new to the community), it seems important to have a code of

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Renato Golin via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > To: "Chandler Carruth" <chandlerc at gmail.com> > Cc: "llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > Sent: Thursday, May 5, 2016 2:06:30 PM > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Resuming the discussion of establishing an LLVM code of conduct > > On 5