search for: cocs

Hi List, I have spent more than 30 minutes, but failed to read in this file using the read.table() function. I could not figure out how to fix the following error. Error in scan(file, what, nmax, sep, dec, quote, skip, nlines, na.strings, : line 1 did not have 6 elements Any help would be be appreciated. Thanks, Pradip Muhuri ####### below is the reproducible example xd1 <-

On 5 May 2016 at 22:19, Tanya Lattner via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> 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. The same way you feel about this code, we feel about the alternative. It's only a matter of perspective. >

On Fri, 30 Nov 2018, Kees Cook wrote: >On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27 AM Jarkko Sakkinen ><jarkko.sakkinen at linux.intel.com> wrote: >> >> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug. I hope this is some kind of joke. How would anyone get offended by reading technical comments? This is all beyond me... Thanks, Davidlohr

> Also, the problem with enumerating all the inacceptable behaviour is > that the text tends to become TL;DR. Which means permanent discomfort: I > never fully read the rules, so I'm never fully sure that I'm not > violating the CoC, nor am I sure whether others violate it. > > In terms of size and complexity, the proposed CoC is shorter than the > typical bulletin

On 14 October 2015 at 14:32, Krzysztof Parzyszek via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > CoC is not going to stop or prevent any harassment. True. > The current administrators of the mailing > lists, or the organizers of the LLVM conferences already have the means to > deal with it. Not really. We haven't had to ban anyone from the list or kick anyone from a

----- 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 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

On Fri, 2018-11-30 at 12:55 -0800, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:56:52AM -0800, Davidlohr Bueso wrote: > > On Fri, 30 Nov 2018, Kees Cook wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27 AM Jarkko Sakkinen > > > <jarkko.sakkinen at linux.intel.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > In order to comply with the CoC, replace

> 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 Fri, 2018-11-30 at 13:44 -0800, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 01:01:02PM -0800, James Bottomley wrote: > > No because use of what some people consider to be bad language > > isn't necessarily abusive, offensive or degrading. Our most > > heavily censored medium is TV and "fuck" is now considered > > acceptable in certain contexts on

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

While I'm replying to Renato here, that is mostly because there are too many replies on this subject, and too many of them have wandered off into other topics. I want to specifically address the concerns with verbosity. For example: On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 3:52 AM Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > I also agree that some descriptions are too verbose, and trying to

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 ). Nice! This is so succinct and beautiful! It doesn't need an overseeing foundation to take opaque decisions, and focus on what's really important: the code. I

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, Oct 13, 2015 at 08:20:33PM +0100, Renato Golin via llvm-dev wrote: > On 13 October 2015 at 19:30, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com> wrote: > > For some of the reasons we at least need to make it clear the scope: > > http://adainitiative.org/2014/02/18/howto-design-a-code-of-conduct-for-your-community/ > > Seems like a very personal opinion, and most

On 05/06/2016 11:03 AM, Jonathan Roelofs wrote: > > > On 5/6/16 11:43 AM, Philip Reames via llvm-dev wrote: >> >> >> On 05/06/2016 09:02 AM, Rafael Espíndola via llvm-dev wrote: >>>>> Say what you want about the Linux kernel community, but you can't >>>>> call >>>>> it immature. You can call the behaviour of some of its

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 12:35:07PM -0800, David Miller wrote: > From: Jens Axboe <axboe at kernel.dk> > Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 13:12:26 -0700 > > > On 11/30/18 12:56 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote: > >> On Fri, 30 Nov 2018, Kees Cook wrote: > >> > >>> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27 AM Jarkko Sakkinen > >>> <jarkko.sakkinen at

On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 7:37 PM, Rafael Avila de Espindola via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Summary: > > I am leaving llvm effectively immediately. I am sorry for any > inconvenience this may cause. > > Practicalities: > > I can unsubscribe myself from the email lists and I disabled email > notification on bugzilla and phabricator. Could someone

+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 ---

On 05/05/2016 11:42 AM, C Bergström via llvm-dev wrote: > On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 2:30 AM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 2:55 AM C Bergström <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >>> Chandler - I do not want to derail, hijack or change the topic of this >>> discussion - Would you be ok with me going into specific