search for: hugload

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. Heh. I support the replacement of the stronger language, but I find "hug", "hugged", and "hugging" to be very weird replacements. Can we bikeshed this to "heck", "hecked", and

Am 01.12.2018 um 09:12 schrieb Jens Axboe: > 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 linux.intel.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug. >> >> I hope this is

From: Abuse <abuse at 2.abuse.bgcomp.co.uk> Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 20:39:01 +0000 > I assume I will now be barred. Perhaps, but not because you said fuck. It would be because you're intentionally creating a disturbance on the list and making it more difficult for developers to get their work done and intentionally creating a distraction and a hostile environment for the discussion

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 linux.intel.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with

From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen at linux.intel.com> Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 13:44:05 -0800 > 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

On 11/30/18 2:47 PM, David Miller wrote: > From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen at linux.intel.com> > Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 13:42:33 -0800 > >> Can you tell how the CoC should be interpreted then? > > Regardless of what I think, as others have showen the CoC explicitly > does not apply to existing code. And with that, can we please put an end to this thread (and

On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 20:39:01 +0000 Abuse <abuse at 2.abuse.bgcomp.co.uk> wrote: > On Friday, 30 November 2018 20:35:07 GMT 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 11:56:52AM -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 **** with a hug. > > I hope this is some kind of joke. How would anyone get offended by

On 11/30/18 8:40 PM, Kees Cook wrote: > Better yet, since it's only 17 files, how about doing context-specific > changes? "This API is terrible", "Hateful interface", "Don't touch my > freakin' code", "What in the world were they thinking?" etc? Or just leave it as is because we're all grown up and don't freak out when a piece of

On 30 Nov 2018, at 14:40, 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. > > Heh. I support the replacement of the stronger language, but I find > "hug", "hugged", and "hugging" to be very weird

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 most channels in the UK and EU. This makes following the CoC extremely hard to a

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 01:57:49PM -0800, James Bottomley wrote: > 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

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 03:14:59PM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 14:12:19 -0800 > Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen at linux.intel.com> wrote: > > > As a maintainer myself (and based on somewhat disturbed feedback from > > other maintainers) I can only make the conclusion that nobody knows what > > the responsibility part here means. > >

On Fri, 2018-11-30 at 14:26 -0800, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 03:14:59PM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote: [...] > > Have you read Documentation/process/code-of-conduct- > > interpretation.rst? > > As has been pointed out, it contains a clear answer to how things > > should be interpreted here. > > Ugh, was not aware that there two documents.

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 02:30:45PM -0800, James Bottomley wrote: > On Fri, 2018-11-30 at 14:26 -0800, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 03:14:59PM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > [...] > > > Have you read Documentation/process/code-of-conduct- > > > interpretation.rst? > > > As has been pointed out, it contains a clear answer to how things

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

Hi Jon, On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:15 PM Jonathan Corbet <corbet at lwn.net> wrote: > On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 14:12:19 -0800 > Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen at linux.intel.com> wrote: > > > As a maintainer myself (and based on somewhat disturbed feedback from > > other maintainers) I can only make the conclusion that nobody knows what > > the responsibility

From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen at linux.intel.com> Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 13:42:33 -0800 > Can you tell how the CoC should be interpreted then? Regardless of what I think, as others have showen the CoC explicitly does not apply to existing code.

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 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

On 30/11/2018 20:40, 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. > > Heh. I support the replacement of the stronger language, but I find > "hug", "hugged", and "hugging" to be very weird replacements.