[Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINER TOPIC FOR KS] CoC and Linus position (perhaps undocumented/closed/limited/invite session)

Daniel Vetter daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch
Tue Sep 18 14:34:34 UTC 2018


On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 3:43 PM, Steven Rostedt <rostedt at goodmis.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Sep 2018 15:55:23 +1000
> Dave Airlie <airlied at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I think there might be place for a report from the people who did sign
>> off the CoC about the thoughts/process involved in updating it (and/or
>> urgency) to the rest of the Maintainer group.
>>
>> Now I understand that having a public talk about such a thing will
>> likely descend into farce, there may be scope for something of a
>> Chatham House Rule style meeting, or just a non-recorded, non-public
>> session like we've done for sensitive subjects are previous kernel
>> summits.
>
> I believe this topic merits a discussion at Maintainer's Summit. It can
> probably be much more productive face to face with several maintainers
> in one room than what would result in a mailing list (both public and
> private) discussion.
>
> I'm willing to lead this if nobody else wants to do it.
>
>   (I don't know why I do this to myself)
>
>
>>
>> It might just be a readout from a similar meeting at Edinburgh summit
>> (maybe someone else can propose that), or maybe some sort of Q&A
>> session. Maybe Linus could record a piece to camera for the
>> maintainers that can't make Edinburgh, but would still like to
>> understand where everything currently sits. Said piece would of course
>> be burned afterwards.
>
> I would like to get an honest opinion from everyone involved, and
> remove any of the ambiguities that people still have.

What suprised me is how quickly this all happened. Back when we've
done the same CoC for freedesktop.org and all the graphics stuff
hosted there, there's been years of hallway track preceeding formally
enacting the CoC. Social expectations on the mailing list already
reflected the consensus that we expect constructive and respectful
collaboration, with informal peer driven enforcement when a maintainer
went a bit over the line. We also had pretty much everyone ack the
documentation patch before it landed. In other words, nothing changed
for dri-devel when we've done this ~2 years ago, except the already
lived expectations have been encoded.

As much as I welcome this as a first step on a fairly long path, it
does feel rushed since it seems to have happened in just ~10 days.
>From chatting with people, I think this left a lot wondering about
what's really going on, with interesting conspiracy theories running
rampant. Personally I have serious worries that to rapid change will
overwhelm the community's ability to process it, with ugly unintended
consequences.
-Daniel

>> After the past 2-3 days I get the feeling there are maintainers unsure
>> about how this affects them and I think assuaging those fears might be
>> a good thing.
>
> Agreed.
>
>>
>> I'm also equally happy nailing the lid back on the can of worms and
>> never discussing it again.
>
> No no, the can is now open and you have released the worms ;-)
>
> -- Steve
> _______________________________________________
> Ksummit-discuss mailing list
> Ksummit-discuss at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ksummit-discuss



-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch


More information about the Ksummit-discuss mailing list