[llvm-dev] Resuming the discussion of establishing an LLVM code of conduct

Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Thu May 5 01:21:56 PDT 2016

Greetings all,

This has come up a few times, and I would like to resume the effort to
establish an LLVM code of conduct.

First and foremost, many thanks to Philip Reames who sat down with me
several months ago and worked through a number of suggestions that I've
tried to incorporate into an updated patch with the draft text:

I think his updates plus a few others go a long way to address some of the
concerns raised in the previous discussions. The big issues I saw being
raised (but in my words, I trust others to chime in with useful
clarifications or corrections as needed):

First and foremost, this should not substantially change the community's
conduct. We have strong existing practice of keeping good behavior. I hope
the wording now makes this reasonably clear.

There were also a number of things unclear or easily mistaken about the
"reporting" process and what happens there. Philip in particular helped
craft significant improvements here, and much of the credit is his. Notable
things improved or addressed IMO:

- Nothing should ever prevent the community from self-enforcing good
behavior much as it has been for a long time.

- When violations are reported, there may not have been any issue at all,
in which case nothing happens.

- Any issue may also have already been addressed much as our community has
addressed issues on its own for many years. In those cases, the committee
need not take any further action.

- The committee will of course need to gather information from those
involved and witnesses, and only make a decision with all of the
information available. I think this is much more clear now.

- Physical spaces may escalate the severity. Although I hope it never
happens, I think it is more clear now that *if* this happens immediate
steps will be taken to ensure everyone's safety and law enforcement
involved if necessary.

- It is structured to make it clear who is on the advisory committee. We
still have to select an advisory committee, etc., which is something I'm
*not* trying to figure out here and now. I think once we have the framework
in place, we can start working on that and adjust the framework if issues
with it come up in the process.

This still isn't a really formal thing with hard and fast rules. But I
don't think that is what the community needs. I do think they provide the
framework the community needs to effectively handle and cope if issues come
up. While I suspect it is impossible to get everyone 100% happy here, I
think this is very close and a reasonable starting point which can be
evolved as necessary if problems arise.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160505/29f0b6e9/attachment.html>

More information about the llvm-dev mailing list