[llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] FYI: Landing the initial draft for an LLVM Code of Conduct

Renato Golin via llvm-dev
2016-06-30T22:45:54Z

I guess the point is that, for some, not having that clause, causes
discomfort and reduce their contribution. For others, having that clause
causes discomfort and reduce their contribution.

I don't think one is more important than the other, nor I think we should
see this as which side makes more contributions.

Daniel's version, although similar, is clearer, and may discourage abuse
even more that Chandler's original fix. I'm OK with that, too.

I guess I prefer to be reactive. If people start abusing, I'll make some
comments, then some noise, than official complaints to the board, etc. If
none of that works, getting out of here is the obvious choice. But that
will take an impressive amount of abuse and carelessness, and the community
will be already fragmented by then.

My tuppence.
Renato
On 30 Jun 2016 11:11 p.m., "Daniel Berlin via cfe-dev" <
cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> That's just a residual clause.
> It's not sanely possible to enumerate all the possibilities here (IE if
> you stalk and murder someone in the llvm community, you are going to get
> kicked out of the community, regardless of if you did it in a controlled
> space)
> I mean, i'm subject to legal ethics rules that are very similar, and
those
> could get me kicked out of an entire profession :)
>
> I guess one could write "In addition, violations of this code outside
> these spaces may, in rare
> cases, affect a person's ability to participate within them, when the
> conduct amounts to an egregious violation of the communitie's social
> standard."
>
> But it's not, in practice, any different.
>
> Basically, if you are looking for complete and total bright line
> proscribed standards, they pretty much don't exist anywhere except in
> criminal statutes :)
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2016, 2:45 PM Robinson, Paul <paul.robinson at
sony.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I expect Rafael's concern is because the code also says:
>>
>>
>>
>> In addition, violations of this code outside these spaces may, in rare
>> cases, affect a person's ability to participate within them.
>>
>>
>>
>> So it can apply outside spaces explicitly sponsored by LLVM, in
undefined
>> circumstances.
>>
>> --paulr
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* cfe-dev [mailto:cfe-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] *On Behalf
Of *Daniel
>> Berlin via cfe-dev
>> *Sent:* Thursday, June 30, 2016 1:37 PM
>> *To:* Rafael Espíndola
>> *Cc:* llvm-dev; cfe-dev; openmp-dev (openmp-dev at lists.llvm.org);
LLDB
>> *Subject:* Re: [cfe-dev] [llvm-dev] FYI: Landing the initial draft for
>> an LLVM Code of Conduct
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 1:23 PM, Rafael Espíndola <
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>
>> I am strongly opposed to it as it stands.
>>
>> Who decided this and with what authority? As written the code of
>> conduct tries restrict the acceptable opinions one may voice even in
>> channels not related to llvm at all.
>>
>> errr, it says:
>>
>> "This code of conduct applies to all spaces managed by the LLVM
project
>> or The
>>
>> LLVM Foundation. This includes IRC channels, mailing lists, bug
trackers,
>> LLVM
>>
>> vents such as the developer meetings and socials, and any other forums
>> created
>>
>> by the project that the community uses for communication. "
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> How does this cover channels not related to llvm?
>>
>>
>>
>> With this in place I will not consider myself a member of the llvm
>> community anymore and would be terrified to interact with another llvm
>> developer in a social setting.
>>
>>
>>
>> That would be sad, but i guess i'm not sure what is causing that.
Is it
>> that there is discretion in there that you are afraid may apply to you
if
>> taken to some extreme?
>>
>>
>>
>> Rafael
>>
>> On 30 June 2016 at 14:55, Chandler Carruth via cfe-dev
>>
>> <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>> > Hello folks,
>> >
>> > As mentioned some time ago[1], we’ve had a long (looooooong)
series of
>> > discussions about establishing a code-of-conduct for the LLVM
project
>> as a
>> > whole over on the llvm-dev thread and the
>> http://reviews.llvm.org/D13741
>> > code review.
>> >
>> > The discussion has largely died down for some time, and towards
the end
>> > there has been pretty wide support for the draft wording we have
now. It
>> > isn’t perfect, and there are still some important questions around
>> forming
>> > the advisory committee to handle reporting, but I think the
wording is
>> at a
>> > good point of compromise in a challenging area.
>> >
>> > Based on the support, I’m going to land the patch that adds the
draft.
>> I’m
>> > hoping this will immediately provide good advice and guidance, and
I’m
>> > hoping to see motion on setting up a reasonable advisory committee
and
>> > resolving any issues around reporting so we can make this an
official
>> part
>> > of the community.
>> >
>> > I sending this as a heads up so folks are aware, not to start a
new
>> > discussion thread. There are existing discussion threads[2] on
llvm-dev
>> if
>> > folks want to join in active discussion or we can start fresh
ones, but
>> I
>> > would encourage people to carefully read the discussion that has
already
>> > taken place to avoid revisiting areas that have already been
heavily
>> > discussed.
>> >
>> > Also, many thanks to the folks who provided all their opinions on
the
>> > mailing list threads and in person in long discussions about this
topic.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > -Chandler
>> >
>> > [1]: Prior announcements:
>> > http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2015-October/091218.html
>> > http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2015-October/045460.html
>> > http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-dev/2015-October/008530.html
>> >
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/openmp-dev/2015-October/000954.html
>> >
>> > [2]: Existing threads:
>> > http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2015-October/091218.html
>> > http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2016-May/099120.html
>> >
>>
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20151019/307070.html
>> >
>>
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > cfe-dev mailing list
>> > cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>>
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160630/b487696b/attachment-0001.html>