search for: d13741

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 wordi...

...a llvm-dev <llvm-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 <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 com...

...e effort to establish an LLVM code of conduct. >> >> First and foremost, many thanks to Philip Reames who sat down with me several months ago and worked through a number of suggestions that I've tried to incorporate into an updated patch with the draft text: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13741 <http://reviews.llvm.org/D13741> >> >> I think his updates plus a few others go a long way to address some of the concerns raised in the previous discussions. The big issues I saw being raised (but in my words, I trust others to chime in with useful clarifications or corrections...

...like to resume the effort to establish an LLVM code of conduct. First and foremost, many thanks to Philip Reames who sat down with me several months ago and worked through a number of suggestions that I've tried to incorporate into an updated patch with the draft text: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13741 I think his updates plus a few others go a long way to address some of the concerns raised in the previous discussions. The big issues I saw being raised (but in my words, I trust others to chime in with useful clarifications or corrections as needed): First and foremost, this should not substant...

...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 rep...

...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 rep...

...> 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 >...

...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 > > t...

...t;mailto: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 rep...

...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 > > t...

...ists.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 ad...

...b-dev < lldb-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 rep...

Am 05.05.2016 um 10:58 schrieb C Bergström via llvm-dev: > Sincerely and pragmatically - what do you think will be different > after this is in place.. Bureaucracy is great, but what's broken or > pandemic that you're trying to fix? From the last discussion, I gather that it's an attempt to prevent damage before it can happen. I'm quite sceptical about that. It's

...ion itself. That feedback was I think well received and will be acted upon. I would expect updates and further discussion there in separate threads though. I've also sent out a patch which would add these documents to the tree, but with them clearly marked as *drafts*: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13741 This is based on the excellent suggestion by Philip. Please only make editorial and structural comments there, we should keep the vast majority of the content discussion here. To that end, the drafts are copied inline at the bottom. Thanks, -Chandler --------- ============================== LLVM...