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

[Philip Reames via lldb-dev]

+1.

On 06/30/2016 04:01 PM, Hal Finkel via llvm-dev wrote:
> ----- 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
>>