Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [Tech-board-discuss] TAB non-nomination

Frank Rowand
2018-11-09T19:54:33Z

On 11/8/18 7:30 PM, Chris Mason wrote:
> On 8 Nov 2018, at 16:04, James Bottomley wrote:
>>
>> Hind sight, though is always perfect. At the time, as a TAB member,
>> all you saw was a panic driven by both Linus and the Linux Foundation
>> that we needed an updated Kernel CoC ASAP, like today.
>
> I think panic is the wrong word to attach to Linus' response, especially
> around the code of conduct.
>
>>
>> The second mistake was picking the wrong CoC. [ ... ]
>>
>> The third mistake was dumping the fully formed CoC and a later update
>> into the tree with little to no community input
>

> The update was entirely based on community input.

I am going to try to parse that sentence very carefully and narrowly.

If you are saying that the update (that is, code-of-conduct-interpretation.rst)
then I would agree that the document appears to have been created
based on community input. But that is merely a conjecture on my part
since the document was created in a small closed group.

If you are saying that the creation of code-of-conduct-interpretation.rst
was done in a process that was open and visible to the community, then
I would disagree. I don't know if this is what you meant to convey,
but it is very easy to interpret the sentence in this way.

-Frank

>> which has generated a
>> lot of obvious anger within our community itself.
>
> It's absolutely true that some members of the community were upset.
>
> We'll never know if there could have been a better time to make code of
> conduct changes. There are a wide range of deeply held beliefs in this
> area, and every choice would have eventually led to major disagreements.
> But what we do know is that everyone sat down and did their best to
> find compromise. That doesn't mean we found the right compromise for
> every developer, but I still really appreciate how much time and energy
> everyone spent explaining their point of view and looking for common
> ground.
>
>> All I'll say on this
>> is that revisiting the CoC is going to cause another huge cascade of
>> externally driven attacks which I think we'd all rather avoid, so if
>> you're still ticked, then perhaps you should channel that anger and
>> stand for the TAB ...
>>
>
> It's really important the TAB is full of people that care about the
> kernel. Anger about the code of conduct isn't a great qualifier, but
> I'll happily encourage anyone who cares deeply about the kernel
> community, even if they disagree with my opinions about how to best
> support it.
>
> -chris
> _______________________________________________
> Tech-board-discuss mailing list
> Tech-board-discuss@lists.linux-foundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/tech-board-discuss
>