similar to: establishing a Code of Conduct for R

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

Greetings all, This has come up a few times, and I would 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

On 5 May 2016 at 21:47, Chris Lattner via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > The Swift community has been using the standard "Contributor Covenant” to > good effect: > https://swift.org/community/#code-of-conduct > http://contributor-covenant.org > > Why do we need to “innovate" here? Hi Chris, I think the swift code is simple, and albeit

>>>>> Suzen, Mehmet <msuzen at gmail.com> >>>>> on Mon, 30 Oct 2017 11:16:30 +0100 writes: > Hi Frank, You could upload your R source file to a public > URL, for example to github and read via RCurl, as source > do not support https as far as I know. well... but your knowledge is severely (:-) outdated. Why did you not try first?

I downloaded the iid.test, but I can't run it. I get the following message: Error: could not find function "iid.test" Where am I supposed to save this package in order that it works? Thanks, EZ [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

On 31 October 2017 at 12:42, Martin Maechler <maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch> wrote: > Notably as I think it's been provided by a company that no > longer exists under that name, and even if that'd be wrong, R-Fiddle > does not seem free software (apart from the R parts, I hope !). For the record, r-fiddle is maintained by datacamp:

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 > >

Dear List, According to datacamp support team, r-fiddle.org is not supported. We asked them to put it down as Professor Maechler suggested it is a waste of time for the R-help to respond to questions on something not maintained and severely outdated. If you would like to use R from your browser, you can embed the following into a web page: <script

On 6 May 2016 at 23:31, Tanya Lattner <tanyalattner at llvm.org> wrote: > I am not going to argue with you anymore. I hope this isn't how we'll deal with CoC violations. > Please stop twisting my words. I'm certainly not twisting your words. I'm sorry you feel that way. I explicitly said I was confused, and I asked questions to understand what the point was. This

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;

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

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Renato Golin via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > To: "Chandler Carruth" <chandlerc at gmail.com> > Cc: "llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > Sent: Thursday, May 5, 2016 2:06:30 PM > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Resuming the discussion of establishing an LLVM code of conduct > > On 5

We were talking about r-fiddle. It gives error there [*], that's why I suggested using RCurl. > source("https://raw.githubusercontent.com/msuzen/isingLenzMC/master/R/isingUtils.R") ... unsupported URL scheme Error : cannot open the connection > On 30 October 2017 at 15:51, Martin Maechler <maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch> wrote: >>>>>> Suzen, Mehmet

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 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. >

I won't disagree about a level of professionalism or what the community does or doesn't need. However, I'd say that pragmatically if profanity was an issue in the workplace, for a large development community, that LKML would have run afoul a long time ago. My view - I'm only replying because the reality is that in the workplace sometimes a full lexicon of words are spoken. I

On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 11:42 AM C Bergström <cbergstrom at pathscale.com> 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 > >>

>>>>> Suzen, Mehmet <msuzen at gmail.com> >>>>> on Mon, 30 Oct 2017 16:05:18 +0100 writes: > We were talking about r-fiddle. It gives error there [*], > that's why I suggested using RCurl. >> source("https://raw.githubusercontent.com/msuzen/isingLenzMC/master/R/isingUtils.R") > ... unsupported URL scheme Error

On 6 May 2016 at 22:21, Tanya Lattner via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> How many is "many, many", actually? How many of these are really in fear, how many are just trying to impose their mindset without actually planning to contribute in earnest, how many are so fearful that they should really seek professional help? > > And this is illustrating my

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