[lldb-dev] [cfe-dev] FYI: Landing the initial draft for an LLVM Code of Conduct

[Hal Finkel via lldb-dev]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Aaron Ballman via cfe-dev" <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> To: "Chandler Carruth" <chandlerc at gmail.com>
> Cc: "llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>, "cfe-dev" <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>, "openmp-dev
> (openmp-dev at lists.llvm.org)" <openmp-dev at lists.llvm.org>, "LLDB" <lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2016 5:34:13 PM
> Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] FYI: Landing the initial draft for an LLVM Code of	Conduct
> 
> Thank you for your continuing efforts on the Code of Conduct! I
> appreciate the efforts and strongly support this direction.
> 
> ~Aaron

+1

 -Hal

> 
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Chandler Carruth via cfe-dev
> <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> > Hello folks,
> >
> > As mentioned some time ago[1], we’ve had a long (looooooong) series
> > of
> > discussions about establishing a code-of-conduct for the LLVM
> > project as a
> > whole over on the llvm-dev thread and the
> > http://reviews.llvm.org/D13741
> > code review.
> >
> > The discussion has largely died down for some time, and towards the
> > end
> > there has been pretty wide support for the draft wording we have
> > now. It
> > isn’t perfect, and there are still some important questions around
> > forming
> > the advisory committee to handle reporting, but I think the wording
> > is at a
> > good point of compromise in a challenging area.
> >
> > Based on the support, I’m going to land the patch that adds the
> > draft. I’m
> > hoping this will immediately provide good advice and guidance, and
> > I’m
> > hoping to see motion on setting up a reasonable advisory committee
> > and
> > resolving any issues around reporting so we can make this an
> > official part
> > of the community.
> >
> > I sending this as a heads up so folks are aware, not to start a new
> > discussion thread. There are existing discussion threads[2] on
> > llvm-dev if
> > folks want to join in active discussion or we can start fresh ones,
> > but I
> > would encourage people to carefully read the discussion that has
> > already
> > taken place to avoid revisiting areas that have already been
> > heavily
> > discussed.
> >
> > Also, many thanks to the folks who provided all their opinions on
> > the
> > mailing list threads and in person in long discussions about this
> > topic.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -Chandler
> >
> > [1]: Prior announcements:
> > http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2015-October/091218.html
> > http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2015-October/045460.html
> > http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-dev/2015-October/008530.html
> > http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/openmp-dev/2015-October/000954.html
> >
> > [2]: Existing threads:
> > http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2015-October/091218.html
> > http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2016-May/099120.html
> > http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20151019/307070.html
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cfe-dev mailing list
> > cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
> >
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
> 

-- 
Hal Finkel
Assistant Computational Scientist
Leadership Computing Facility
Argonne National Laboratory