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 161AB1348 for ; Wed, 26 Sep 2018 14:01:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailout.easymail.ca (mailout.easymail.ca [64.68.200.34]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DA681773 for ; Wed, 26 Sep 2018 14:01:35 +0000 (UTC) To: Mauro Carvalho Chehab , James Bottomley References: <1537830902.4935.1.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20180926093013.1ff3e2ef@coco.lan> From: Shuah Khan Message-ID: <445e2ebf-e095-712b-fb72-1ded38681963@kernel.org> Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2018 08:01:17 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180926093013.1ff3e2ef@coco.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org, olof@lxom.net, Greg Kroah-Hartman Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [TECH-TOPIC] Review - Code of Conduct: Let's revamp it. List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 09/26/2018 06:30 AM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > Em Mon, 24 Sep 2018 16:15:02 -0700 > James Bottomley escreveu: > >> On Mon, 2018-09-24 at 08:24 -0600, Shuah Khan wrote: > >>> What is offensive is a bit more clear. It will be learning curve for >>> us as a community and I do think we will get there. I believe our >>> kernel community at large is respectful and helpful. >> >> Actually, reading the above and agreeing with it I think the main >> problem is that what we're discussing as a Code of Conduct isn't one at >> all; it's really an anti Harassment policy. That's why I think it >> doesn't cover the email reviews and things very well and why we're all >> concerned that it gives maintainers a load of responsibilities they >> can't really police. >> >> Perhaps we could do with finding a middle ground between the previous >> code of conflict, which was fairly tailored to our environment but >> lacked some specifics and the new code of conduct which doesn't seem to >> be well tailored at all for us. > > Agreed. > >> Perhaps what we're looking for as the middle ground is something based >> on the Debian code of conduct (obviously with modifications for us): >> >> https://www.debian.org/code_of_conduct > Debian code of conduct is to the point and outlines what is expected very clearly and uses positive language. "Assume good faith" and "Be open" especially stood out for me as striking the positive and inclusive tone. > Interesting! They have a separate CoC for mailing lists: > > https://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct > Thanks for finding this. This looks good and summarizes "what to do" and "what not do" that would help us. Probably will need some tweaks to customize it to suit better for our environment. thanks, -- Shuah