linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org,
	Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@iki.fi>
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH] code-of-conduct: Remove explicit list of discrimination factors
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 06:45:22 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <c28df7c4-eb3f-3864-862c-edc330a8fce8@roeck-us.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181017091325.GA15991@localhost>

On 10/17/2018 02:13 AM, Josh Triplett wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 09:19:01AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> Providing an explicit list of discrimination factors may give the false
>> impression that discrimination based on other unlisted factors would be
>> allowed.
> 
> This impression is, in fact, false, as has already been discussed
> elsewhere. I had hoped that discussion would suffice.
> 
> As mentioned there: The original commit explicitly said "Explicit
> guidelines have demonstrated success in other projects and other areas
> of the kernel."; this is precisely the kind of explicit guideline it
> refers to. Listing explicit cases to cover does not imply other cases
> are not covered; it does, however, ensure that the listed cases *are*,
> and helps people know that they're covered.
> 

That is really a matter of opinion. Mathematically speaking, your statement
is incorrect. One may wonder why the list is made explicit without hint
that it is an example. For example, political or social views are _not_
listed. Wasn't the same CoC used in other projects to at least try to
punish individuals with specific political and/or social opinions,
just for having those opinions and expressing them outside the scope of
the project ?

> This patch is not OK, and defeats one of the purposes of the original
> change.

The CoC, as it stands, singles out maintainers for enforcement action.
Based on your statement, is it correct to assume that this was on
purpose ? If not, what is the explicit list of purposes of the
original change ?

Guenter

  parent reply	other threads:[~2018-10-17 13:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-10-17  7:19 [PATCH] code-of-conduct: Remove explicit list of discrimination factors Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-10-17  9:13 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " Josh Triplett
2018-10-17  9:31   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-10-17 13:32     ` Guenter Roeck
2018-10-17 15:22       ` Josh Triplett
2018-10-17 15:21     ` Josh Triplett
2018-10-17 15:49       ` James Bottomley
2018-10-17 16:00         ` Josh Triplett
2018-10-17 18:36       ` Mark Brown
2018-10-17 13:45   ` Guenter Roeck [this message]
2018-10-17 16:18   ` Joe Perches
2018-10-22 21:06 ` Pavel Machek
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2018-10-07  8:51 Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-10-07 11:35 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " Josh Triplett
2018-10-07 17:18   ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-10-08  2:29     ` Josh Triplett
2018-10-08 14:12       ` Tim.Bird
2018-10-08 14:27         ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-10-08 14:36           ` Tim.Bird
2018-10-08 14:30         ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-10-08 15:43           ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-10-08  8:55   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-10-08 12:02   ` Mark Brown
2018-10-08 15:42   ` Alan Cox
2018-10-08 16:14     ` Josh Triplett
2018-10-10 20:55 ` Frank Rowand
2018-10-10 21:15   ` [Ksummit-discuss] " Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2018-10-10 22:16   ` Josh Triplett
2018-10-10 22:33     ` Eric S. Raymond
2018-10-10 23:35       ` Frank Rowand
2018-10-11  8:12     ` Rainer Fiebig

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=c28df7c4-eb3f-3864-862c-edc330a8fce8@roeck-us.net \
    --to=linux@roeck-us.net \
    --cc=James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
    --cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
    --cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
    --cc=ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tomi.valkeinen@iki.fi \
    /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).