lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Sep]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Code of Conduct: Let's revamp it.
Em Tue, 18 Sep 2018 21:16:14 +0200
Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> escreveu:

> On Mon 2018-09-17 14:24:30, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 01:48:52PM +0200, Lukas Wunner wrote:
> > > Seriously though, I read this to know what I need to be aware of but oddly
> > > the language of this paragraph says it doesn't apply to me: I'm not using
> > > an official project e-mail address nor an official social media account,
> > > nor has anyone appointed me as representative. I can live with that, I'm
> > > just wondering what the benefit of a document is that only seems to apply
> > > to a tiny fraction of the community.
> >
> > I do not think you are reading the document correctly. As an example,
> > it should cover any emails sent to this list. That is not a "tiny
> > fraction" by my last count :)
>
> In typical "being nice but not really honest", you failed to answer
> the other question in this comment.
>
> Lukas asked:
>
> > > to a tiny fraction of the community. Has this CoC been discussed
> > > anywhere?
> > > I'm not seeing it in the LKML or ksummit-discuss archive.
>
> And yes, I see problems with this CoC. You seriously expect "all
> maintainers" to ban Al Viro for commenting in his usual funny way?
>
> Derogatory comments are now prohibited, so what you do now when
> receiving bad code? Ignore it completely? _That_ is evil.
>
> What is wrong with ’s in the document? Normal ascii is '. Same mistake
> was in Linus' announcement. Does it have same author?
>
> Publishing email address without explicit permission is now
> prohibited. WTF? How does that interact with signoffs? Merging GPLed
> code is no longer allowed when the original author can not be reached?
>
> Who is author of the document? First signoff is by Chris Mason (is
> that signoff chain real?) but Greg is listed as author.
>
> The document does not describe current practices. It was not
> discussed. Yet it states that contributors pledge... and it tries to
> speak for me? That does not exactly sound like a positive environment
> to me.
>
> No thanks,

Agreed. Despite its "welcoming/nice language" (whatever it is), the way
it was written I can't see any good coming from it. It reminds code of
conducts used by some radical groups where it is up to the neighbors to
apply surveillance over their communities, in order to punish them.

Also, it turns maintainers into baby-sitters, forcing them to
do a lot of non-technical stuff in order to punish bad behaviors.
When they fail[1], the maintainers get punished.

[1] Maintainers sooner or later will fail: no maintainer I know has
PhD on psychology (or whatever it is required) in order to teach
good manners to grown ups.

Also, how someone would avoid a misconduct on "public spaces when
an individual is representing the project or its community"?

That basically states that no maintainer or Kernel developer can
ever be drunk on a LF party.

Sorry guys, no more beer :-) (nor Scotch while in Edinburgh)

Thanks,
Mauro

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-09-19 12:31    [W:0.105 / U:0.812 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site