linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
To: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
Cc: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH 2/2] code-of-conduct: Strip the enforcement paragraph pending community discussion
Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2018 12:04:36 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181008190435.GA3963@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <FA87081B-1344-4CC8-8BCC-F00A985719FF@fb.com>

On Mon, Oct 08, 2018 at 02:15:25PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> On 6 Oct 2018, at 17:37, James Bottomley wrote:
> > Significant concern has been expressed about the responsibilities
> > outlined in
> > the enforcement clause of the new code of conduct.  Since there is
> > concern
> > that this becomes binding on the release of the 4.19 kernel, strip the
> > enforcement clauses to give the community time to consider and debate
> > how this
> > should be handled.
> 
> Even in the places where I don't agree with the discussion about what our
> code of conduct should be, I love that we're having it.  Removing the
> enforcement clause basically goes back to the way things were.  We'd be
> recognizing that we know issues happen, and explicitly stating that when
> serious events do happen, the community as a whole isn't committing to
> helping.
> 
> It's true there are a lot of questions about how the community resolves
> problems and holds each other accountable for maintaining any code of
> conduct.  I think the enforcement section leaves us the room we need to
> continue discussions and still make it clear that we're making an effort to
> shift away from the harsh discussions in the past.

Emphatically seconded.

I absolutely agree that we should to work on the enforcement section
over time; for instance, I agree that a dedicated team (ideally with
some training) would be better than vesting this in a technical
decision-making body.

But I agree with Chris that we should not remove this entirely. And I
don't think there's any special significance to this being in the 4.19
release as compared to an -rc or git HEAD.

  reply	other threads:[~2018-10-08 19:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 59+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-10-06 21:35 [PATCH 0/2] code of conduct fixes James Bottomley
2018-10-06 21:36 ` [PATCH 1/2] code-of-conduct: Fix the ambiguity about collecting email addresses James Bottomley
2018-10-07  8:25   ` [Ksummit-discuss] " Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-10-07 15:25     ` Shuah Khan
2018-10-07  9:04   ` Daniel Vetter
2018-10-07  9:54     ` Hannes Reinecke
2018-10-07 15:29     ` James Bottomley
2018-10-08 19:49       ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-07 17:53   ` Guenter Roeck
2018-10-07 22:25   ` Dave Airlie
2018-10-07 22:56     ` Al Viro
2018-10-07 23:02       ` Al Viro
2018-10-07 23:37       ` Dave Airlie
2018-10-08 10:14         ` Mark Brown
2018-10-08 19:32         ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-08 17:05       ` Luck, Tony
2018-10-08 14:08     ` James Bottomley
2018-10-10 16:36     ` Pavel Machek
2018-10-08 15:20   ` Josh Triplett
2018-10-08 15:30     ` James Bottomley
2018-10-08 19:23       ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-08 19:57         ` Josh Triplett
2018-10-09 10:55           ` Mark Brown
2018-10-09 18:29     ` Rainer Fiebig
2018-10-09 18:56       ` Josh Triplett
2018-10-09 19:38         ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-10-09 19:44           ` James Bottomley
2018-10-10  7:22             ` Rainer Fiebig
2018-10-10  5:52           ` Rainer Fiebig
2018-10-10  7:08         ` Rainer Fiebig
2018-10-08 19:24   ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-10 20:48   ` Frank Rowand
2018-10-06 21:37 ` [PATCH 2/2] code-of-conduct: Strip the enforcement paragraph pending community discussion James Bottomley
2018-10-06 21:43   ` [Ksummit-discuss] " Tim.Bird
2018-10-07  3:33     ` James Bottomley
2018-10-08 13:51       ` Tim.Bird
2018-10-08 14:09         ` James Bottomley
2018-10-08 17:58           ` Tim.Bird
2018-10-08 18:11             ` James Bottomley
2018-10-08 18:54               ` Tim.Bird
2018-10-08 15:03         ` jonsmirl
2018-10-08 15:37       ` Alan Cox
2018-10-11  7:42         ` Dan Carpenter
2018-10-07 15:32   ` Shuah Khan
2018-10-07 17:56   ` Guenter Roeck
2018-10-07 19:51   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-10-08 18:15   ` Chris Mason
2018-10-08 19:04     ` Josh Triplett [this message]
2018-10-08 20:23   ` [Ksummit-discuss] " Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-10 15:53     ` Alan Cox
2018-10-10 17:19       ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-10 20:09         ` Alan Cox
2018-10-10 20:30           ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-07 17:11 ` [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH 0/2] code of conduct fixes Daniel Vetter
2018-10-07 17:40   ` James Bottomley
2018-10-07 17:50     ` jonsmirl
2018-10-07 17:52     ` Daniel Vetter
2018-10-10 16:12     ` Pavel Machek
2018-10-10 16:25       ` Randy Dunlap

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=20181008190435.GA3963@localhost \
    --to=josh@joshtriplett.org \
    --cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
    --cc=clm@fb.com \
    --cc=ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).