Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DRM/FreeDesktop Code of Conduct Submitted To Linux 4.12

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • DRM/FreeDesktop Code of Conduct Submitted To Linux 4.12

    Phoronix: DRM/FreeDesktop Code of Conduct Submitted To Linux 4.12

    Earlier this week David Airlie sent in the big DRM pull request of new feature material for the Linux 4.12 kernel. That main pull request added in 457,052 lines of new code to the kernel while now a secondary pull request has been submitted that adds just 11 new lines...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...CoC-Linux-4.12

  • #2
    I hope Linus can see trough this and see the contribitor covenant for what it is (orwellian thought police masquerading as common decency).

    For those not familiar with it, the versions by the original author include a number of clauses which basically state that the leadership of the project has to investigate any claims made by members that they've been made to feel uncomfortable by something someone else in the project has said even when said statements are well outside of the project. The language on what's actually to be enforced and how far beyond the scope of the project (wording specifically talks about "public spaces") has intentionally been left very vague so it's essentially a blank check for people who want to punish people for disagreeing with them. Even the harshness of the punishments and how the decision to punish or not punish has been left very vague.

    When it comes to people getting into hot water because of this I've so far seen one person get into hot water with their project for discussing the flaws and limitations of representational democracy on their own blog and another person have the same thing happen to them discussing the concept of gender on a forum very much removed from the project they were contributing to.

    Under this you technically can't reject bad code or offer any kind of criticism of code being committed if the author of the code or the person whose work is being criticized doesn't want to be criticized. Something like this really has no place in a project with any kind of focus on code quality.

    If you want to see how you achieve the same thing without the parts that are specifically intended to be abused, have a look at what the Ruby community wrote up and adopted when they tried to coerce them to adopt the same code of conduct.
    Last edited by L_A_G; 05-05-2017, 01:38 PM.
    "Why should I want to make anything up? Life's bad enough as it is without wanting to invent any more of it."

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by L_A_G View Post
      I hope Linus can see trough this and see the contribitor covenant for what it is (orwellian thought police masquerading as common decency).

      For those not familiar with it, the versions by the original author include a number of clauses which basically state that the leadership of the project has to investigate any claims made by members that they've been made to feel uncomfortable by something someone else in the project has said even when said statements are well outside of the project. The language on what's actually to be enforced and how far beyond the scope of the project (wording talks about "public spaces") has intentionally been left very vague so it's essentially a blank check for people who want to punish people for disagreeing with them. Even the harshness of the punishments and how the decision to punish or not punish has been left very vague.

      When it comes to people getting into hot water because of this I've so far seen one person get into hot water with their project for discussing the flaws and limitations of representational democracy on their own blog and another person have the same thing happen to them discussing the concept of gender on a forum very much removed from the project they were contributing to.

      Under this you technically can't reject bad code or offer any kind of criticism of code being committed if the author of the code or the person whose work is being criticized doesn't want to be criticized. Something like this really has no place in a project with any kind of focus on code quality.
      Total rubbish. Bad code will still be rejected, this is to deter bad behaviour. You don't need to verbally abuse someone to reject their code, you're more likely to gain developers by treating them well and helping them learn when they make mistakes. It sets a good example and the Mesa mailing list is already good at doing this.

      This is only spelling out what is already done in practice

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by FireBurn View Post

        Total rubbish. Bad code will still be rejected, this is to deter bad behaviour. You don't need to verbally abuse someone to reject their code, you're more likely to gain developers by treating them well and helping them learn when they make mistakes. It sets a good example and the Mesa mailing list is already good at doing this.

        This is only spelling out what is already done in practice
        I recommend that you actually go and read the thing because the at times incredibly vague wording means this can be used for anything from what's being done already to some pretty Orwellian stuff. Actually, the wording that explicitly states that this should also be enforced outside the scope of the project makes it Orwellian in nature even when interpreted in a lenient way.

        The thing about authoritarianism, and this is no exception, is that it's usually motivated as being for the common good and that it's merely enforcing good things that are already in place or ensuring that they're upheld. What's done after authoritarians get their way tends to be something completely different.
        Last edited by L_A_G; 05-05-2017, 08:53 AM.
        "Why should I want to make anything up? Life's bad enough as it is without wanting to invent any more of it."

        Comment


        • #5
          Why is this needed?

          Comment


          • #6
            This is nothing but an attempt of SJW to seize control over the kernel community.

            SJWs always lie.
            SJWs always double down.
            SJWs always project.

            These people's objective is just to gain undeserved power to manipulate others into do their bidding.

            SJW in whatever shape or color are a cancer to society.

            If someone can't deal with the pressure of being called names in a highly competitive environment they should create their own kernel on their own safe space and leave the rest of the world alone.

            This is what will happen to Linus: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...testimony.html

            And no, I'm not exaggerating, if the Linux kernel is "converged" to sjw Linux/GNU is done.
            Last edited by JPFSanders; 05-05-2017, 09:51 AM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Ha! I can't wait for Linus to comment on this itself. My money says he'll use the most colorful language to date just to ironically refute it.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by JPFSanders View Post
                If someone can't deal with the pressure of being called names in a highly competitive environment they should create their own kernel on their own safe space and leave the rest of the world alone.
                AFAIK, this is not the military service. Respect is of uttermost importance, always.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by wargames View Post

                  AFAIK, this is not the military service. Respect is of uttermost importance, always.
                  Respect is only ever earned, not given out like free cookies

                  --------------

                  Honestly what should happen is everyone should leave freedesktop and find a new hosting provider.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    It's not just "pressure". It is just being in an environment of being rejected or taunted and never getting chances vs being in a forgiving environment that is pleasant to be in. Where would you rather work/contribute to?

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X