Re: [Ksummit-discuss] Call to Action Re: [PATCH 0/7] Code of Conduct: Fix some wording, and add an interpretation document

Al Viro
2018-10-23T04:52:53Z

On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 03:25:08PM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:

> >> If Linus is not true to his new-found sensitivity, we might need someone
> >> (Greg?) to be a co-maintainer, able to accept patches when Linus has a
> >> relapse. It might be good form to create this channel anyway, but I
> >> doubt it would be needed in practice.
> >>
> >> So there you have it. The "Code" is upside down.
> >> We need documents which:
> >> - curtail the power of the strong, starting with Linus
> >> - are adopted willingly by individuals, not imposed on the community.
> >> - provide alternate routes for patch-flow, so that no-one has ultimate
> >> power.
> >
> > Really? The ultimate power being to say "No" to a patch, and nobody should
> > have such? Are you fucking serious?
>
> I have noticed of late a tendency in all sorts of different people to
> hear/read a statement from someone they know, interpret it a particular
> way, be surprised about that interpretation, and persist with believing
> that interpretation anyway, rather than realizing that the most likely
> explanation is a communication failure, and asking for clarification.
>
> The "ultimate power" is the ability to say "no" to a patch, *with no
> opportunity for review*. Two people together having that ultimate power
> is a totally different thing to one person having it alone.

If that's a clarification, I'm sorry to say that I understand you even less now.
What are you proposing? Duopoly? How do you deal with disagreements? Fork?
Revert wars?

Frankly, CoC as-is is a bloody awful idea wide-open to abuses, but what you
are proposing feels even more incoherent...