DRM/FreeDesktop Code of Conduct Submitted To Linux 4.12

[robclark]

As for this change, though, I don't see why a code of conduct belongs inside the repository. If you want to put this code of conduct on the mailinglist, send it to people who seem to be violating it, otherwise what's the point of having a file somewhere on the filesystem?

The fact is, this is a sinister effort by sinister people. These people don't really care about any of the people supposedly "protected" by this CoC; they just want to tell you how to speak, because they are insecure and guilty. They're insecure and guilty largely because they are the exact people these codes of conduct aim to police. They are the exact people who have malice of intent when they speak to you. They want to present themselves as the heroes of this conflict because they know that they are the villains.

Any amount of capitulation to this nonsense will be followed up by more demands.

And the worst part is, it will probably hurt the inclusion of minorities in these communities, by making it downright dangerous to even speak to them.

Sorry to burst your bubble but the phoronix peanut gallery doesn't get to tell us how to run our community. This is, as the commit message states, simply documenting how we already work. (I'm one many "sinister" drm devs who ack'd this patch)

[Frogging101]

Sorry to burst your bubble but the phoronix peanut gallery doesn't get to tell us how to run our community. This is, as the commit message states, simply documenting how we already work. (I'm one many "sinister" drm devs who ack'd this patch)

Then why have it at all? Sounds like your community doesn't need it. And even if that weren't the case, writing common sense into law won't fix a bad community.

[danvet]

Then why have it at all? Sounds like your community doesn't need it. And even if that weren't the case, writing common sense into law won't fix a bad community.

It's just documentation, and only applies to the drm subsystem. We're not trying to change or fix the kernel at large here at all, but since the kernel overall has explicitly documented that abusive and disrespectful discussions are expected (in the code of conflict) it's worth to highlight that drm is a bit different. If you browse around in the docs there's other drm specialities we document, like the expectations we have for merging new userspace api, or where our todo list with beginner and cleanup tasks is and how/why we merge simple my-first-contribution patches from newbies.

And as Rob said, might be worth to read the actual patch and the long list of people who acked it. Spoiler: It includes all the drm driver maintainers and many of the long term contributors, with no one objecting.

[onicsis]

Better than that, can't be said

The fact is, this is a sinister effort by sinister people.
Any amount of capitulation to this nonsense will be followed up by more demands.

What's next dictatorship of minorities over the majority.

[TheAaronB123]

It's just documentation, and only applies to the drm subsystem. We're not trying to change or fix the kernel at large here at all, but since the kernel overall has explicitly documented that abusive and disrespectful discussions are expected (in the code of conflict) it's worth to highlight that drm is a bit different. If you browse around in the docs there's other drm specialities we document, like the expectations we have for merging new userspace api, or where our todo list with beginner and cleanup tasks is and how/why we merge simple my-first-contribution patches from newbies.

And as Rob said, might be worth to read the actual patch and the long list of people who acked it. Spoiler: It includes all the drm driver maintainers and many of the long term contributors, with no one objecting.

Well, considering if they want patches accepted by the people they are supposed to be working with as a rep of the company, they have to. It's the same as crap employers making people do group cheers and garbage nobody wants to do. But you go along with it be cause you have to.


This stuff is a cancer to the project. Your code quality will dictate your treatment. People committing crap code need crapped on so they stop doing it. Same as Linux as a whole, which is how it goes down currently. Not broken, don't fix it.

[Holograph]

Please, no. Not now, not ever.

I'm sorry to be so blunt but Linus Torvalds is an unrepentant prick. I was going to try and get into kernel development but when I saw this abusive monster spitting his vile venom at people just trying to help, for free, I simply couldn't do it. I would never allow someone to be so disrespectful and ungrateful. Really, I'm sure if he'd just retire there would be many more kernel developers.

Excuses. Ridiculous.

[microcode]

Sorry to burst your bubble but the phoronix peanut gallery doesn't get to tell us how to run our community. This is, as the commit message states, simply documenting how we already work. (I'm one many "sinister" drm devs who ack'd this patch)

You didn't author the patch though, did you. You're a fine chap and you contribute hugely, but I doubt you can read minds.
You might think these policies are immune to abuse, but that doesn't make it true.

I don't blame you for supporting it, I might have a few years ago; but, respectfully, I suggest you have a little bit more scepticism for this approach to community management.

Heartless as I may sound, I posit that a software project does not survive on compassion, it survives on productivity and tangible support.

Because I respect you, I doubt you would give up on developing Freedreno mid-way because somebody called you a name in a mailing list and said you should give up. Linus has been called many things, and he's still there. I'd reckon that people who are willing to do productive work don't just give up because somebody said an insensitive thing in an email about them. Conversely, if the wager is threats against your livelihood and allegations to your employer, I can think of many respectable people who would not even bother to start. The definitions of acceptable ways to speak to people will change over time on the whims of the few. Most people will think that each of the changes seems perfectly reasonable until at some point they get unfairly tarred and have nobody to go to. Apparently there's no accomodation for the autistic, or the mentally infirm here; they get the bullet too, and all in the name of compassion.

[willmore]

Sorry to burst your bubble but the phoronix peanut gallery doesn't get to tell us how to run our community. This is, as the commit message states, simply documenting how we already work. (I'm one many "sinister" drm devs who ack'd this patch)

I find it ironic that you violated the Code of Conduct in your email defending your support of it. Well done.

[JTRealms]

It's really infuriating to see Young Turks try to seize control over the Linux development community. Linus is Linux, if you don't want to interact with Linus, then find some other kernel to contribute too. But it's frankly pathetic that people seem to think they deserve respect, but it's symptomatic of the software developers today's universities indoctrinate. It's a worrying thought that when Linus and the senior maintainers pass the torch, politics will be much more important to their successors than code quality.

[L_A_G]

If it's the sole factor you use, yes. I was just trying to make people realize how ridiculous they sound when they start talking about "SJW" conspiracies and dystopian futures over a CoC on a software project.

Well it would have been ridiculous a few years ago. However it's no joke anymore with the stuff that's happening in U.S politics and being reflected in what's happening on university campuses. Hell, even these codes of conduct written to police what people are allowed to say even outside of the project have already been used for just that.

I voted for a third party candidate

So you essentially just wasted your vote? Well good for you...