[llvm-dev] RFC: Introducing an LLVM Community Code of Conduct

[Krzysztof Parzyszek via llvm-dev]

I like the NCoC approach, actually.  I think the community can manage 
itself quite well.  Echoing a prior response---if this community really 
needs a set of rules, then it has already deteriorated.  We are not 
there and it doesn't look like we are going in that direction.

The FreeBSD CoC also looks reasonable, and if any CoC is needed, I find 
this one more appealing.

-Krzysztof


On 10/13/2015 11:16 AM, Kuperstein, Michael M via llvm-dev wrote:
> The "No Code of Conduct" ( https://github.com/domgetter/NCoC ) version of this is "This project adheres to No Code of Conduct. We are all adults. We accept everyone's contributions. Nothing else matters."
>
> I'm not advocating something like this, but I tend to agree with the sentiment that Django-style codes of conduct over-define and over-"legalize".
>
> The FreeBSD CoC is, IMHO, much better in this respect ( https://www.freebsd.org/internal/code-of-conduct.html ).
>
> Michael
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of Robinson, Paul via llvm-dev
> Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2015 18:43
> To: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] RFC: Introducing an LLVM Community Code of Conduct
>
>> Also, the problem with enumerating all the inacceptable behaviour is
>> that the text tends to become TL;DR. Which means permanent discomfort:
>> I never fully read the rules, so I'm never fully sure that I'm not
>> violating the CoC, nor am I sure whether others violate it.
>>
>> In terms of size and complexity, the proposed CoC is shorter than the
>> typical bulletin board CoC, so it's not bad; however, it think it
>> could be made more compact.
>
> Compactness is a definite virtue. I remember attending a very successful series of science-fiction conventions years ago, where the only formally stated conduct policy was "You kill it, you eat it."  More extensive elaboration was deemed to be too prone to over-interpretation by people trying to get away with stuff, without actually providing useful guidance.
>
> As a year-round 95% online community, rather than a weekend convention with dozens of physically present staff, LLVM probably does need something a bit more detailed, but if the basic statement can't be reduced to a screenful or so then it's too much.
> --paulr
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Intel Israel (74) Limited
>
> This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
> the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
> by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
> recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>


-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, 
hosted by The Linux Foundation