From: Rainer Fiebig <jrf@mailbox.org>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>,
ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH v2 0/3] code of conduct fixes
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2018 12:43:45 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8067297.9B3jLnrCay@siriux> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87efcxtmhf.fsf@xmission.com>
Am Mittwoch, 10. Oktober 2018, 18:23:24 schrieb Eric W. Biederman:
> James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com> writes:
>
> > Resend to show accumulated tags and also to add a third patch listing
> > the TAB as the reporting point as a few people seem to want. If it
> > gets the same level of support, I'll send it in with the other two.
>
>
> There is also:
>
> > Our Responsibilities
> > ====================
> >
> > Maintainers are responsible for clarifying the standards of acceptable behavior
> > and are expected to take appropriate and fair corrective action in response to
> > any instances of unacceptable behavior.
> >
> > Maintainers have the right and responsibility to remove, edit, or reject
> > comments, commits, code, wiki edits, issues, and other contributions that are
> > not aligned to this Code of Conduct, or to ban temporarily or permanently any
> > contributor for other behaviors that they deem inappropriate, threatening,
> > offensive, or harmful.
>
> Which is very problematic.
> a) In append only logs like git we can not edit history.
> Making it a mainters responsibility to edit the history, to do the
> impossible is a problem.
>
> b) There are no responsibilities of for people who are not Maintainers.
> That is another problem.
>
As a reminder/clarification one could introduce a line like this:
Responsibilities
================
All participants are responsible for complying with this Code of Conduct.
Maintainers are responsible for[...]
> c) The entire tone of the reponsibilities section is out of line with a
> community where there are no enforcement powers only the power to
> accept or not accept a patch. Only the power to persuade not to
> enforce.
>
> Overall in the discussions I have heard people talking about persuading,
> educating, and not feeding trolls. Nowhere have I heard people talking
> about policing the community which I understand that responsiblity
> section to be talking about.
>
I think Eward Cree aired this concerns early on in the discussion:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/9/19/234
> Increasingly I am getting the feeling that this document does not the
> linux development community. Perhaps a revert and trying to come up
> with better language from scratch would be better.
[...]
+1.
Nobody would get hurt or loose face by doing so. On the contrary.
My suggestion would be:
- revert the patch
- discuss the matter (and the way it was introduced) at least at the next MS
- setup a task-force to come up with a new proposal
- discuss the proposal
- make corrections, if necessary
- implement it
IMO there's no need to rush things in a matter so important for the future
of the project.
So long!
Rainer Fiebig
--
The truth always turns out to be simpler than you thought.
Richard Feynman
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-11 10:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-10-10 20:07 [PATCH v2 0/3] code of conduct fixes James Bottomley
2018-10-10 20:08 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] code-of-conduct: Fix the ambiguity about collecting email addresses James Bottomley
2018-10-10 22:17 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " Eric W. Biederman
2018-10-11 2:33 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-15 20:58 ` Kees Cook
2018-10-10 20:09 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] code-of-conduct: Strip the enforcement paragraph pending community discussion James Bottomley
2018-10-10 21:04 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " Luck, Tony
2018-10-10 21:19 ` James Bottomley
2018-10-10 21:28 ` Luck, Tony
2018-10-15 21:02 ` Kees Cook
2018-10-11 2:37 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-10 20:10 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] code-of-conduct: Add back the TAB as the central reporting point James Bottomley
2018-10-10 20:13 ` Alan Cox
2018-10-11 2:30 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-11 6:50 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-10-10 21:04 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2018-10-10 23:23 ` [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH v2 0/3] code of conduct fixes Eric W. Biederman
2018-10-10 23:41 ` Al Viro
2018-10-11 0:00 ` James Bottomley
2018-10-11 3:11 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-11 10:43 ` Rainer Fiebig [this message]
2018-10-11 6:39 ` Tomi Valkeinen
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=8067297.9B3jLnrCay@siriux \
--to=jrf@mailbox.org \
--cc=James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.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).