Re: [PATCH] drm: Document code of conduct

From: Luc Verhaegen <libv@skynet.be>
To: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
	Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	Xorg Members List <members@x.org>,
	DRI Development <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm: Document code of conduct
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 17:14:50 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170411151450.GB31533@skynet.be> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87fuhfxcys.fsf@intel.com>

On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 04:58:51PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Apr 2017, Luc Verhaegen <libv@skynet.be> wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 03:36:32PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> >> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Luc Verhaegen <libv@skynet.be> wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 03:24:04PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> >> >> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 3:12 PM, Luc Verhaegen <libv@skynet.be> wrote:
> >> >> > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 08:48:15AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> >> >> >> freedesktop.org has adopted a formal&enforced code of conduct:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> https://www.fooishbar.org/blog/fdo-contributor-covenant/
> >> >> >> https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/CodeOfConduct/
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Besides formalizing things a bit more I don't think this changes
> >> >> >> anything for us, we've already peer-enforced respectful and
> >> >> >> constructive interactions since a long time. But it's good to document
> >> >> >> things properly.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Note: As Daniel Stone mentioned in the announcement fd.o admins
> >> >> >> started chatting with the communities their hosting, which includs the
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "started" and "chatting"? That is very weakly formulated.
> >> >>
> >> >> Intentionally so ...
> >> >>
> >> >> >> X.org foundation board, to figure out how to fan out enforcement and
> >> >> >
> >> >> > This was not voted upon or even mentioned during the last board meeting.
> >> >> > And i think the next board meeting is only in 2 days time. As such, this
> >> >> > seems like it is not something that's officially sanctioned by the X.org
> >> >> > foundation board, but you sure do try to make it sound like such.
> >> >>
> >> >> ... because it is not yet sanctioned by the board in any way. So not
> >> >> exactly sure where you're reading this into my commit message, because
> >> >> it wasn't my intention to make it sounds like this is sanctioned by
> >> >> the xorg board officially, nor did I state that anywhere. I just said
> >> >> that discussions already started to happen, that's really all there
> >> >> is.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks for making that clear.
> >> 
> >> Yeah I understand the confusion, since it wasn't clear that this mail
> >> was written by me with my drm maintainer hat on, not me in my role as
> >> xorg bod secretary. Nor me as an intel employee. I should have made
> >> that clearer.
> >
> > I was not confused about that, especially since you mentioned the board.
> > But this clearly was not something already approved by the X.org 
> > foundation board.
> 
> Since there is a lot of "it" and "this" in both your and Daniel's
> messages, without clarifying what you're both actually talking about, I
> think for clarity it should be noted that, AFAIU, the decision to adopt
> the CoC is up to the freedesktop.org admins, not the X.org board, and
> the discussion about enforcing is to take place between the two.

It's the way in which this is being done that makes me very weary of 
this code of conduct.

It seems like a very unilateral move, quite likely by just a single 
person. There is no record of any prior discussion, not with the 
affected projects, not on any mailing list, not on the irc channels 
where i am on (and i doubt it is logged publicly anywhere). This commit 
Daniel Vetter just posted comes the closest to any discussion, wayland 
never was so lucky. This feels like the typical freedesktop.org move, 
and i am quite allergic to those as i and the projects i have been 
involved in have been the target of such unilateral decisions several 
times.

I see the mentioning of the X.org foundation board here as an attempt to 
give this surprise Code of Conduct some gravitas which it didn't 
deserve, as it was far too easily debunked. The board of directors never 
voted on this, and i would like to see the emails of the discussion 
prior to this mentioning here. If there were any, they were not before 
the surprise wayland commit.

I would welcome such a code of conduct though, if it had been the result 
of an honest, open and transparent community discussion. But that's not 
something i have often seen at freedesktop.org. And i have a feeling as 
to how it will be applied and who or what projects it will be applied 
to, and how transparent that process will be. If people would be 
interested in seeing this Code of Conduct retro-actively, i might have a 
few cases that i would want to bring up, though.

Luc Verhaegen.
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel