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

Renato Golin via llvm-dev llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Thu May 5 08:22:26 PDT 2016

On 5 May 2016 at 15:52, C Bergström <cbergstrom at pathscale.com> wrote:
> I won't disagree about a level of professionalism or what the
> community does or doesn't need. However, I'd say that pragmatically if
> profanity was an issue in the workplace, for a large development
> community, that LKML would have run afoul a long time ago.

Even though I disagree with that part of their behaviour in general,
that's actually a very good point.

> I don't like Chanlder's wall of text, because it doesn't seem simple
> enough - should I draft up an alternative for review? I'd highly favor
> common sense and super simple


Which also stemmed from people complaining that there wasn't a CoC so
they would not participate (and would actively encourage others to

In fact, there was a code of sorts:


but since that wasn't on the web page, and didn't have the "official"
wording, those people didn't accept as official.

I'll leave as an exercise to the reader to understand how those
people's CoCs have let them rule other people's communities on how to
behave "properly".


More information about the llvm-dev mailing list