similar to: Does samba have a code of conduct?

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

> 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 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 Fri, May 6, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Renato Golin via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On 6 May 2016 at 19:16, Philip Reames via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > 1) Person A makes a documented serious physical threat against Person B > who > > is a member of the LLVM community. Person A does not then get to come > into > >

> 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

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

On Wed, 2017-09-13 at 12:54 +0200, Suzen, Mehmet wrote: > Dear Colleagues/Developers/R enthusiasts, > > Would it be possible to develop a code of conduct (CoC) document for > R lists, CRAN submissions that all developers/maintainers to follow? > This may help all of us to better communicate and move forward > together. > There is a similar effort from Python community, here

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 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 Friday, May 6, 2016, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > On 6 May 2016 at 19:34, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com <javascript:;>> > wrote: > > This isn't just about what we can do today, but about explaining it to > > people who haven't seen us do it/don't know what the community norms > are. So > > that when

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 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

Dear Colleagues/Developers/R enthusiasts, Would it be possible to develop a code of conduct (CoC) document for R lists, CRAN submissions that all developers/maintainers to follow? This may help all of us to better communicate and move forward together. There is a similar effort from Python community, here are the links: * https://mail.python.org/pipermail/scipy-dev/2017-August/022044.html *

On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 2:16 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 1:04 PM Jon Roelofs via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> >> >> On Friday, May 6, 2016, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: >> >>> On 6 May 2016 at 19:34, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com>

This actually was discussed at EuroLLVM. Several other things were occupying my time that have in the last month cleared out, and I'm expecting to have an update to the CoC stuff in the next few weeks. It hasn't been forgotten though. =] On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 5:20 PM Philip Reames via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Chandler, > > It's been 5 months

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 >

Great, glad to hear there's an update on the way. Is there anything I can assist with? Philip On 03/22/2016 05:21 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote: > This actually was discussed at EuroLLVM. > > Several other things were occupying my time that have in the last > month cleared out, and I'm expecting to have an update to the CoC > stuff in the next few weeks. It hasn't

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. >

Hi, I've cross-posted this to freedesktop@, as the xdg@ list is only used for actual specification development. On Mon, 22 Oct 2018 at 00:36, Jacob Lifshay <programmerjake at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, we were thinking of asking if freedesktop would host Kazan (https://github.com/kazan-3d/kazan) for us, however some of our community members have objections with how freedesktop's

Weighing in as a mostly-lurker: A CoC is a great idea. I'm ok with Chandler's current draft. I'm ok with his first draft. I'm ok with just adopting a standard one like Swift did. I think it's important to enumerate several of the most common kinds of harassment, and it's understood that it's not a comprehensive list. I think the pedantry of this thread is unwarranted;