Another Change Proposed For Linux's Code of Conduct

[profoundWHALE]

This is all wasted effort.

What amazes me is how often I hear patches getting rejected, not because they add anything worse, but because it isn't good enough to warrant the changes required to implement it and maintain it when they already have something that works.

But then this CoC gets added, and now it's almost back to what it was before.

So here is what I want to know: why did they make these changes in the beginning? Did they just want clarification on what is acceptable and what isn't? If it's the latter, then why did they add a bunch of ambiguous things in the new CoC?

My opinion: Take the old code of conduct (before the sjw one) and add a statement from Linus which provides a list of unacceptable behaviour. He can be held more accountable (I could be wrong but it seems like he is being targeted personally) and there would be less ambiguity.

[xiando]

I don't follow. The rules should strictly apply to the mailing list only. Whatever you do in your life outside shouldn't matter.

That's just not how it works in practice. And that's why having a CoC at all is a bad idea: Nut-jobs show up and complain that you wrote some joke in your blog or on some obscure forum 10 years ago and demand that you're kicked out. We've seen plenty examples already.

[dungeon]

This is all wasted effort.

It is not wasted, as a result Linux will be hated same as Microsoft

This harassment-free is actually harassment-full

We are living in strange times where transgender woman wins female cycling world championship So just cut off your penis and you can be a champion very easely and by default, supported by all vendors with life time warranty without small letters

[xiando]

This is a good example of why shit that happens outside the project can, and in many cases should, have baring on their inclusion within a project. Reiser killed people, should we just ignore that because he has proven to write some pretty good code. He's an extreme case yes but it still backs up why you do need to look at a persons conduct outside a project.

I disagree with this. Let's say he gets out of prison in 10 years after having served his time and he submits some patches. Should those really be ignored because he committed a crime many & served his time many years ago? I don't think so. But I know some disagree, I'm aware that some countries won't let you vote if you have been convicted for a crime ever.

Where do you draw the line, anyway? Should a case of shoplifting 10 years ago get you banned from kernel development?

[dungeon]

Where do you draw the line, anyway?

Nowhere OR just draw a line where your borders are

There are problems with both solutions as first is impossible and second means less freedoms

Should a case of shoplifting 10 years ago get you banned from kernel development?

What kernel development? Kernel is majorly finished long long time ago , so there is no much development anymore, mainly you have just pusherers and maintaince workers

Problem is we are living in era of lazy devs let say Python developers and these are more and more of course not classy enough just yet... still shit... yet shit

So it is finished, there is not what to do much... so now goes era of takingovers with very various false flag tricks

[profoundWHALE]

I disagree with this. Let's say he gets out of prison in 10 years after having served his time and he submits some patches. Should those really be ignored because he committed a crime many & served his time many years ago? I don't think so. But I know some disagree, I'm aware that some countries won't let you vote if you have been convicted for a crime ever.

Where do you draw the line, anyway? Should a case of shoplifting 10 years ago get you banned from kernel development?

I like this reminder because people forget that once the time is served, their debt to society is supposed to be paid. If there's never any redemption, then why don't we just execute people?

[nanonyme]

I like this reminder because people forget that once the time is served, their debt to society is supposed to be paid. If there's never any redemption, then why don't we just execute people?

Vive la revolution?

[johanb]

And the point of that would be? Sounds like completely off topic then, or maybe he has a major gripe with that person due to how he influences the kernel (e.g. systemd, you know the drama). This is perfectly acceptable.

A community can still be toxic even though they internally are nice to each other.

For example: Ku Klux Klan

What's next? Can't curse Microsoft if they enforce a patent to screw the kernel over, because you need to hold hands with everyone?

The code of conduct is about avoiding discrimination, reluctance based on concrete criticism is still allowed.

[bridgman]

I don't follow. The rules should strictly apply to the mailing list only. Whatever you do in your life outside shouldn't matter.

That's just not how it works in practice. And that's why having a CoC at all is a bad idea: Nut-jobs show up and complain that you wrote some joke in your blog or on some obscure forum 10 years ago and demand that you're kicked out. We've seen plenty examples already.

I have to think that clearly stating the rules apply only to the mailing list (or infrastructure performing a similar purpose) would help limit the "I demand you be kicked out of the kernel project because I find your personal beliefs offensive" effect of a too-broad CoC.

It would probably need to include conditions preventing you from (for example) shaming or insulting a kernel developer on another medium about something they posted on the mailing list but nothing broader than that.

[discordian]

Shit, it's the 21st century, and its still necessary to write complicated text instead of saying "be nice to each other"?
Such CoC often are are trojan horse, some changes later you end up having to report colleagues who do damaging things like printing 5 personal sheets on the office printer. I get why big companies like them, I don't get it why communities need them.