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 AFDBF8D7 for ; Tue, 25 Sep 2018 15:23:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailout.easymail.ca (mailout.easymail.ca [64.68.200.34]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E00925A for ; Tue, 25 Sep 2018 15:23:02 +0000 (UTC) To: Jonathan Corbet , Jani Nikula References: <87tvmdvoaj.fsf@intel.com> <20180925073848.5f42a8ec@lwn.net> From: Shuah Khan Message-ID: Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2018 09:22:39 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180925073848.5f42a8ec@lwn.net> 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 09/25/2018 07:38 AM, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 13:56:04 +0300 > Jani Nikula 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. thanks, -- Shuah (I am speaking for myself)