From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
Cc: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [GIT PULL] code of conduct fixes for 4.19-rc8
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2018 10:01:17 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181023090117.GF2103@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181023070750.GB3068@localhost>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1388 bytes --]
On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 08:07:50AM +0100, Josh Triplett wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 09:16:20PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > As James Bottomley has suggested multiple times,
> > I'd much rather kernel development use the debian
> > code of conduct verbatim than even this modified one.
> > https://www.debian.org/code_of_conduct
> The Debian code of conduct doesn't do nearly as good a job of addressing
> issues. (Debian also adopted that code of conduct back when such codes
> weren't nearly as well understood or established.) Many people *in*
> Debian, including supporters of their current CoC, have an interest in
> improving it further and/or adopting a more well-established one.
It was recent enough that a lot of the complaints people might have
these days actually got levelled at Debian at the time it was
introduced, and those divergences were for the most part the result of
deliberate decisions. A big part of this was based on the knowledge
that there's a particular tendency to rules lawyering in parts of the
Debian community, both generally and specifically with the sorts of
behavioural stuff that codes of conduct are designed to address (there's
been examples of people trying to push the limits there before, it's not
just a theoretical concern). It's definitely an old code of conduct and
could be improved but that's not the only thing going on there.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-23 9:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-10-20 20:15 [GIT PULL] code of conduct fixes for 4.19-rc8 James Bottomley
2018-10-22 21:10 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2018-10-23 4:16 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " Joe Perches
2018-10-23 6:05 ` Randy Dunlap
2018-10-23 6:10 ` Joe Perches
2018-10-23 7:07 ` Josh Triplett
2018-10-23 9:01 ` Mark Brown [this message]
2018-10-23 9:09 ` James Bottomley
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=20181023090117.GF2103@sirena.org.uk \
--to=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--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).