[cfe-dev] [llvm-dev] RFC: Moving toward Discord and Discourse for LLVM's discussions

[Roman Lebedev via cfe-dev]

On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 7:11 AM Zachary Turner via cfe-dev
<cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 4:52 PM Nemanja Ivanovic via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>
>> If I am not mistaken, there are two things that are becoming clear:
>> 1. For email, nobody seems to be against Discourse as long as the mailing lists are still a supported way to participate. So this seems non-controversial.
>> 2. For IRC, people seem to be happy with switching to a more modern solution, but Discord is largely disliked by a significant portion of respondents.
>>
>> So perhaps we can focus the discussion on "if not Discord, what else?"
>>
>> Slack appears to be problematic due to lack of moderation capabilities. Although I don't understand that, I think it is fine - does not meet a key goal so we can't consider it.
>>
>> This Matrix thing was brought up by some as a possibly viable way forward. Can we look into whether it meets all the goals?
>>
>> Perhaps a good start would be to list the goals. So far it seems like:
>> - moderation capabilities
>> - no terms of service that give the provider ownership of content for all eternity
>> - IRC integration
>> - preferably open source and standard protocols
>> - free?
>
>
> I’m still not totally sold on needing extensive moderation capabilities.  As mentioned earlier, Chromium — an open source project with more developers than LLVM — has a code of conduct similar to LLVMs and manages to get by with a Slack server while still maintaining their code of conduct.  It’s possible we’re fundamentally different than Chromium in some way, but I’d like to understand what those are before we decide it’s impossible to have a professional and welcoming environment, because there seems to be an existence proof to the contrary.
>
> IRC integration, as far as i can tell, is an explicit *non* goal.
Pardon me if i'm mistaken, but having a baseline non-goal of
explicitly not supporting something that is the current status quo
seems to me like the opposite of being inclusive, but more like
being "let's just shake/change things up and force everyone else
to adjust to the new reality."

> FWIW, imo the best way to be welcoming to be new people and/or outsiders is to use tools that they probably already have some exposure to.  Being open source is a nice-to-have, but I think it’s a mistake to weigh that heavily in comparison to usability, familiarity, and feature set
Roman
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev