From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A0CC1052 for ; Thu, 20 Sep 2018 20:14:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ms.lwn.net (ms.lwn.net [45.79.88.28]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B474542D for ; Thu, 20 Sep 2018 20:14:16 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:14:13 -0600 From: Jonathan Corbet To: Laurent Pinchart Message-ID: <20180920141413.3c463f55@lwn.net> In-Reply-To: <12303202.TmDbdoTgoG@avalon> References: <2153698.dD80FJtCWu@avalon> <12303202.TmDbdoTgoG@avalon> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: mchehab+samsung@kernel.org, James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com, Tim.Bird@sony.com, ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINER TOPIC FOR KS] CoC and Linus position (perhaps undocumented/closed/limited/invite session) List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, 20 Sep 2018 22:55:17 +0300 Laurent Pinchart wrote: > After the > Bastille fell, it was wise not to speak out before knowing what the new power > to be would consider appropriate. Having an official forum to report > questions, doubts, fears and other feelings (I would say concrete proposals > too, but that could turn into a bit of a bikeshedding chaos) to help making > sure the FAQ will address the questions of the community - and not the > questions that the TAB believes are the important ones, even if the TAB tries > to do its best - would in my opinion be useful. It could be the ksummit- > discuss mailing list, I just feel that some sort of green light is needed. I > might be too optimistic though. [Speaking for myself only, obviously] As somebody who has spent the day taking a fair amount of criticism for saying that people have reasons to be worried about a change done in this manner, I can relate. But I don't believe there are any guillotines being set up within the community, and I think it's crucial that we talk about how we want things to work. Nobody should count on the TAB - or the maintainers summit - to come up with all of the right questions, much less all of the right answers. There are some *seriously* irrational discussions happening out there on the wider net, and we sure don't want to reproduce that here. But, to the extent that we can discuss things rationally, we should. > To lead by example, I'll ask a question of mines. Since Linus' announcement > that took many people by surprise (obviously not everybody as the code of > conduct patch was signed by several TAB members, but by no means by a vast > majority of the community), all sort of discussions took place in private, and > rumours have started spreading regarding the events that led to this > situation. I believe I'm not the only one who would like to be informed about > the history of this unusual development. You're not alone. I think that almost nobody has the complete picture right now - me included - and that should be rectified. I will try to help make this happen; it may take a little while. Thanks, jon