On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 11:19:51AM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Wed 26-09-18 09:54:00, Jani Nikula wrote:

> > This may well be the biggest reason the "code of conlict" did not
> > succeed, despite the large number of acks.

> One thing I'm missing: Did "code of conflict" really fail? I find the areas
> which I follow (filesystems and surroundings) pretty civil but so they were
> even before "code of conflict"... So maybe I miss some events?

There's a few things there.  One is that the name doesn't really convey
the idea that this is a particularly serious document, and the content
of the document doesn't do a lot of things that are considered good
practices for codes of conduct.  A big part of the goal with codes of
conduct is to send a signal to people outside the community that these
issues are taken seriously and that they will get backup if there's a
problem and this stuff meant that it didn't really have those effects,
people externally didn't take it seriously.