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

[Renato Golin via llvm-dev]

On 5 May 2016 at 13:23, C Bergström <cbergstrom at pathscale.com> wrote:
> Is the list PG, PG-13, R or at what level do "we" adults all consider
> "ok". Even on broadcast tv (in the US) you'll hear some profanity.
> (context)
> https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/obscene-indecent-and-profane-broadcasts

Excellent context!


> Some people have pointed out that they don't like the R-rated style of
> the LKML. Profanity and no holds barred just isn't for some people. I
> can respect that, but personally I find it more funny and raw/honest.

I don't care much about the swearing like "s***, I broke the bots
again", but I understand not everyone is like that, so I avoid to the
best of my abilities.

I can easily cope with "this code is a piece of s***", because
sometimes it really is. Some people take it personal, though, so it's
best if we all always avoid that kind of talk.

But there's nothing dubious about: "you are a piece of s*** for
writing this code". That is totally unacceptable.

Now, encoding this in the CoC is the hard part...


> In the world there exists arbitrators/moderators - Why not define a
> couple of "adults" who have demonstrated a history of strong and
> reasonable character. People who can defuse situations and basically
> be the guy which "we" trust to make good decisions. Elect 3 -
> something pops up... we go to them to make a decision or help fix
> stuff. It's low volume so shouldn't be a burden.. they would likely
> help out anyway..

That's another point I had forgotten.

I don't think the people in this committee should be nominated, but
voted. This is more than just the LLVM Foundation doing stuff on the
side, this is out whole community, of which the foundation is only
part of.

I feel very strongly about that, even if I trust the people that get
nominated. Others might not, and that'd be against the very code we're
trying to uphold.

cheers,
--renato