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

[Renato Golin via llvm-dev]

On 5 May 2016 at 23:22, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote:
> Renato, I’m confused about your approach here.  At this point, you seem persistently interested in discussing whether having a code of conduct is the right thing or not.

No, I'm asking for arguments in favour. So far, arguments were mostly
against, because all those in favour didn't have to discuss against
the status quo.

This led to those against lacking understanding of the real arguments.
I think Tanya is putting forward good arguments, so that's cool.


>  This is missing the point: we’re committed to it, and want to make sure that we get reasonable processes and policies in place.
>
> If we find out that they are problematic in practice, we can and will course correct.

I think some of us are finding it problematic in practice, but we
don't seem to be correcting it.

Chandler did some corrections, most of them welcome, but the most
important thing hasn't been even discussed: who and how are we
choosing the committee. This makes a lot of difference as to how the
CoC will be interpreted.

--renato