From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
Cc: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
Tech Board Discuss
<Tech-board-discuss@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
"ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org"
<ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] TAB non-nomination
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2018 11:23:26 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e0ec26aa685f53e741f66e757a2cf29307ce3b7e.camel@perches.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181109190305.GD21078@thunk.org>
On Fri, 2018-11-09 at 14:03 -0500, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 09, 2018 at 10:52:55AM -0700, Shuah Khan wrote:
> > > > The third mistake was dumping the fully formed CoC and a later update
> > > > into the tree with little to no community input
I agree with this statement.
> So what was done with the update to the CoC was that a proposed set of
> changes was sent out to the top 200 or so contributors to the kernel,
> by git statistics over the past year, asking for their comments and
> their sign-offs.
I believe that did not happen as described as at least
I was not asked for input/comment/sign-off and I am
well within that top 200 or so list.
> So there *was* community input, and that input did
> result in changes to the CoC update.
>
> Could there be a better process? I think we're all open to input. If
> someone would like to suggest a better way to handle things, that
> would be great.
Open posting of suggested changes with a waiting
period for comment of at least a week.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-11-10 0:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-11-09 0:04 James Bottomley
2018-11-09 0:29 ` [Ksummit-discuss] [Tech-board-discuss] " Steven Rostedt
2018-11-09 3:30 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " Chris Mason
2018-11-09 17:52 ` Shuah Khan
2018-11-09 19:03 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2018-11-09 19:23 ` Joe Perches [this message]
2018-11-10 21:21 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2018-11-10 21:47 ` Joe Perches
2018-11-12 17:15 ` James Morris
2018-11-09 20:17 ` [Ksummit-discuss] better hot-topic discussion processes was: " Jason Cooper
2018-11-10 19:26 ` Chris Mason
2018-11-10 21:55 ` Jason Cooper
2018-11-14 18:25 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-11-09 19:54 ` [Ksummit-discuss] [Tech-board-discuss] " Frank Rowand
2018-11-10 19:15 ` Chris Mason
2018-11-10 21:59 ` Jason Cooper
2018-11-11 3:18 ` Frank Rowand
2018-11-11 5:57 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2018-11-12 4:44 ` NeilBrown
2018-11-12 4:54 ` NeilBrown
2018-11-12 17:00 ` Steven Rostedt
2018-11-13 16:49 ` Jani Nikula
2018-11-13 19:59 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-11-14 17:28 ` Mark Brown
2018-11-09 17:19 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " Stephen Hemminger
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=e0ec26aa685f53e741f66e757a2cf29307ce3b7e.camel@perches.com \
--to=joe@perches.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=Tech-board-discuss@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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