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

[C Bergström via llvm-dev]

If I do spend the time to make a reasonable draft - I'd only ask that
the ballot has it as an option to vote on.

On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 2:43 AM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 7:53 AM C Bergström <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>
>> I don't like Chanlder's wall of text, because it doesn't seem simple
>> enough - should I draft up an alternative for review? I'd highly favor
>> common sense and super simple
>
>
> I don't think it makes sense to start from scratch, but perhaps others
> disagree.
>
> Looking at this thread and the previous threads (of which there have been
> several) there seems to be pretty widespread support for the general
> direction, and most of the comments on the current wording are important but
> relatively narrow in scope.