ksummit.lists.linux.dev archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com>
To: Tim.Bird@sony.com, shuah@kernel.org, corbet@lwn.net,
	jani.nikula@intel.com
Cc: olof@lxom.net, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
	ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [TECH-TOPIC] Review - Code of Conduct: Let's revamp it.
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2018 01:04:30 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <6b6933ba-284e-adec-6060-0bf51c4fc7e7@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ECADFF3FD767C149AD96A924E7EA6EAF80512DBA@USCULXMSG01.am.sony.com>

On 09/25/2018 09:51 AM, Tim.Bird@sony.com wrote:
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Shuah Khan
>>
>> On 09/25/2018 07:38 AM, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>>> On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 13:56:04 +0300
>>> Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Is the implication that further discussion on this is futile?
>>>>
>>>> Fire-and-forget is not exactly the best approach for rolling out a code
>>>> of conduct.
>>>
>>> I doubt anybody is going to forget! :)
>>
>> It is disappointing that it had to be committed without following the usual
>> process. That said, I do support the direction and stating the expectations.
>>
>>>
>>> This is only my opinion, but I don't believe that the current CoC is set
>>> in stone and immune to further changes.  It is something to start with.
>>> I expect we will end up evolving it, like we evolve our other code.  We
>>> will need to figure out how to do that, though; that discussion has not
>>> yet even begun.
>>>
>>
>> One of the reasons for starting this thread is to get a clear understanding
>> of the intent for next steps and the next steps for involving the community
>> and evolving  the CoC. I hope a concrete plan or some plan emerges out of
>> this
>> discussion.
>>
>> Since the way it currently reads, it adds to maintainer responsibilities,
>> it is important to open it up for review by all maintainers as opposed to
>> participants of just the Maintainer Summit which is a very small group.
> 
> I am speaking only for myself, but I couldn't agree more, on all points.
> 
> I think Mauro raised some very good points about aspects of the CoC
> being a better fit for a github-style project as opposed to a widely
> distributed e-mail based project.  And certainly the ambiguity regarding the
> treatment of published e-mails as private information needs to be
> resolved.  So I think it's unquestionable that the CoC will need to change.
> 

Fedora is going through a similar process to revamp its code of conduct.
It's not fully released yet but from talking to some people involved,
they started from the contributor covenant and made some changes and
amendments. Some of the amendments were to clarify the purpose of the
code of conduct. Given Fedora also has a heavily e-mail based workflow,
I think this is a good indication it should be possible to make
modifications to meet our needs.

Thanks,
Laura

  reply	other threads:[~2018-09-26  8:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-09-24 14:24 Shuah Khan
2018-09-24 17:51 ` James Morris
2018-09-24 18:11   ` John W. Linville
2018-09-24 19:54     ` Josh Triplett
2018-09-24 20:46     ` Olof Johansson
2018-09-24 22:21       ` Thomas Gleixner
2018-09-25  4:26         ` Daniel Vetter
2018-09-25  6:21           ` Olof Johansson
2018-09-25  8:45             ` Thomas Gleixner
2018-09-25 16:42               ` Daniel Vetter
2018-09-25 20:03                 ` Shuah Khan
2018-09-25  6:46           ` Dan Williams
2018-09-24 19:31 ` Jason Cooper
2018-09-26 20:57   ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-09-24 23:15 ` James Bottomley
2018-09-25  1:35   ` Joe Perches
2018-09-26  6:54     ` Jani Nikula
2018-09-26  9:19       ` Jan Kara
2018-09-26  9:58         ` Hannes Reinecke
2018-09-26 12:35           ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-09-26 16:43         ` Mark Brown
2018-09-26 17:03           ` Tim.Bird
2018-09-26 12:30   ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-09-26 12:51     ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-09-26 14:01     ` Shuah Khan
2018-09-25 10:56 ` Jani Nikula
2018-09-25 13:38   ` Jonathan Corbet
2018-09-25 15:22     ` Shuah Khan
2018-09-25 16:51       ` Tim.Bird
2018-09-26  8:04         ` Laura Abbott [this message]
2018-09-26 14:47           ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2018-09-27  8:30             ` Laura Abbott
2018-10-04 16:27 ` James Bottomley
2018-10-05 18:10   ` Shuah Khan
2018-10-06 21:39     ` James Bottomley
2018-10-07 15:27       ` Shuah Khan

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=6b6933ba-284e-adec-6060-0bf51c4fc7e7@redhat.com \
    --to=labbott@redhat.com \
    --cc=Tim.Bird@sony.com \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=jani.nikula@intel.com \
    --cc=ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=olof@lxom.net \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox