7 ms·

I don't like how the 'manifesto' presents SQLite's code of ethics as nefarious: We take our code of conduct seriously, and unlike SQLite, we do not substit

I don't like how the 'manifesto' presents SQLite's code of ethics as nefarious: We take our code of conduct seriously, and unlike SQLite, we do not substitute it with an unclear alternative. We strive to foster a community that values diversity, equity, and inclusion. We encourage others to speak up if they feel uncomfortable. It seems in bad faith to imply that SQLite is some sort of toxic, anti-diversity space. It's not. it's just a closed-to-contributions open source project. Richard is pretty friendly guy and I'm not certain if efforts have been made to reach out to him here. https://github.com/libsql/libsql/blob/main/README.md https://github.com/libsql/libsql/blob/main/README.md

incomingpain 4y ago
- HideousKojima 4y ago
  "This document was originally called a "Code of Conduct" and was created for the purpose of filling in a box on "supplier registration" forms submitted to the SQLite developers by some clients." From the very first line of the link.
  - incomingpain 4y ago
    Good catch, i glossed over history. Apparently HN wants open source projects to push morality. I am quite downvoted.
    - eitland 4y ago
      Half of HN detest Code of Conduct and that among other things is why we love the what the SQLite team has done here.
      - incomingpain 4y ago
        I detest pretty much all(including sqlite's) codes of conduct. None of them are about getting rid of toxicity but rather exercising power over people. Alas, I have even been flagged by the admins. I must have been really off base with my comment in a way I don't understand.
bitwize 4y ago
A code of conduct that covers all the bases of the gold standard for such things, the Contributor Covenant -- including explicitly promoting DEI, protecting everyone but especially members of marginalized communities from harassment, and delineating explicit enforcement procedures and committees -- is table stakes for an open source project today. Not having one presents compliance issues for companies who otherwise might adopt your project.
- zmgsabst 4y ago
  > including explicitly promoting DEI > Not having one presents compliance issues for companies who otherwise might adopt your project. Insisting that people adhere to your ideology through “compliance” sounds very totalitarian.
  - afavour 4y ago
    It really doesn't. No-one is insisting on anything, really. "If you'd like us to adopt your technology, do X" gives both parties a choice in the matter and total freedom to walk away.
    - lliamander 4y ago
      1. It's creepy that corporations are having expectations about how volunteer effort to create code that they use for free runs itself (or claims to run itself). It's generally not even being made for the corporations that are using it - the software is made for everyone to use (and fork) as they see fit. 2. These corporations are not engaging in this behavior spontaneously. They are responding to a legal regime which is increasingly becoming totalitarian.
      - cryptonector 4y ago
        To be fair this was corporations that actually pay for development of SQLite via the SQLite Consortium.
roblabla 4y ago
This is probably refering the SQLite Code of Ethics debacle. SQLite has a Code of Ethics, which is used for ticking a box when working with some of their clients (meaning: they probably don't take it very seriously). For this code of ethics, they chose to use the christian Rule of St. Benedict[0]. When it was implemented, it ruffled some feathers in a fairly major way. While it's true that SQLite is closed to code contributions, they do still accept discussions on their forums, among other things. Those interactions would, supposedly, be bound to the CoC. The sqlite devs later cleared up that it was there for client compliance reasons, but the damage was done. I don't think this line is in bad faith. It's basically spelled out on their code of ethics page that they basically don't care too much about it and is mostly there for ticking boxes. [0]: https://sqlite.org/codeofethics.html https://sqlite.org/codeofethics.html
- mmastrac 4y ago
  > This document continues to be used for its original purpose - providing a reference to fill in the "code of conduct" box on supplier registration forms. It seems somewhat deceitful to use this list to check those boxes, which makes this entire page self-contradictory (specific points highlighted): > 24. Do not entertain deceit in your heart. > 28. Utter only truth from heart and mouth. > 39. Be not a grumbler.
  - mort96 4y ago
    Where's the deceit? The page is incredibly honest about it, any client which cares will immediately see the purpose of the document. It's working around bureaucracy. Nothing more, nothing less. Given SQLite's position, that's incredibly understandable.
    - mmastrac 4y ago
      Working around bureaucracy is still deceit. The spirit of the ethics they state here would suggest a good faith effort to put together a true code of conduct, however basic. The ethics that Christianity teach don't have a backdoor because it's big corporate.
tantalic 4y ago
> and unlike SQLite, we do not substitute it with an unclear alternative This portion of the statement is harsh, and I think the project could do better by stating what they are doing and why, rather than focusing on what SQLite is doing and why it is bad. I would say that it seems feasible (to me) that SQLite's "Code Of Ethics" works for a small team, open-source, closed-contribution model but wouldn't work for the open-contribution model that libSQL is trying to achieve.
Rebelgecko 4y ago
One of the things I think is really innovative [1] about SQLite's code of conduct is that it's a one-way covenant. The developers are agreeing to act and engage with the community in a certain way without expecting anything in return or enforcing any of their beliefs on others. The rules are also very clearly defined, even the ones I personally don't agree with. I think the new "Contributor Covenant" is a step backwards. It's pages and pages of text to say "don't be a jerk", and the rules are so poorly defined that it isn't much more precise than a one liner saying "don't be a jerk". There's lots of catch-alls like "... And any other unprofessional behavior is against the rules". You could stretch this to cover almost anything. Hell, I've worked in professional settings where wearing shorts was verboten, but I don't think open source projects should be policing how participants dress except in the most extreme circumstances (like if someone shows up to a convention naked when it isn't pre-planned as being a naturist event) I find it confounding that the the new covenant is described as being less vague when it relies on poorly defined terms like "community spaces" and "community leaders". What's a community space? Who are the community leaders? Idk, but I've seen a handful of cases these covenants have been weaponized against developers expressing their personal opinions in a context that has nothing to do with Github. [1]: I know calling it innovative is a bit ironic when most of it was written 1500 years ago, but it's innovative compared to other software projects. (Edited for grammar and to flesh out why I think the new covenant is vaguer despite the author's claim, unlike the old one with well-defined rules)
- VancouverMan 4y ago
  These days, I find myself feeling far more comfortable and trusting when a software community doesn't have a "code of conduct", and when it doesn't have a "moderation team" or "community leader enforcement". Censorship, or even just the threat of censorship, causes far greater harm to a software community than a small number of thin-skinned people getting "offended" every now and then, usually over trivial and irrelevant matters.
  - mschuster91 4y ago
    > Censorship, or even just the threat of censorship, causes far greater harm to a software community than a small number of thin-skinned people getting "offended" every now and then, usually over trivial and irrelevant matters. Projects that do not promise to at least enforce a basic level of civility however lose a potential coder base as well, and that is people who are not "mainstream" and have to fight for survival (all too often literally, even in Western countries) in the meatspace already all day: women, gender-queer, people of color, people of non-Christian religions... last thing they want is toxic gamer bro culture seeping into spaces where they are active. Anecdata, but anyway: I've been on HN for a few years now and very often the lead developers for extremely complex and interesting stuff, particularly reverse engineering, fall under that umbrella somehow. The "free market" shows just exactly where the highest talent classes are, and it's not the whiners whining about CoCs preventing them from spamming "I identify as an Apache helicopter" memes.
devwastaken 4y ago
ReptileMan 4y ago
Sqlite works. I strongly suggest other projects adopting their code of conduct. Seems to deliver awesome results.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
narrator 4y ago
This code of conduct is there to prime the foundation for the takeover of by outsiders. With for profit companies, they can just buy the company. For non-profits, outsiders takeover by instituting DEI and then find something that they can make a big deal out of, or outright lie to get the founders kicked out and take over the organization.
pseudalopex 4y ago
> It seems in bad faith to imply that SQLite is some sort of toxic, anti-diversity space. They said SQLite's code of ethics is unclear. You inferred any other criticism.
glommer 4y ago
it's not nefarious, it's just a different approach to things. I think Hipp is justified in all he is doing, and I don't think he is necessarily wrong. We just see things differently
- adamgordonbell 4y ago
  Fair enough, It could be read that way. I get frustrated that the code of ethics gets so much attention of sqlite, in a bike shed type of way. But by mentioning that, I think I've drawn even more attention to it. My bad.
mackal 4y ago
- e44858 4y ago
  [Citation needed]
- how_rude 4y ago
  How rude.
- MichaelCollins 4y ago
  Intolerance towards religion is toxic and anti-diversity. In America, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 makes discriminating against people because of their religion illegal in many contexts. If you can't work alongside somebody who is religious, then you become a liability to any corporation that respects this law.
  - mackal 4y ago
    Why must I be tolerant towards the intolerant?
    - MichaelCollins 4y ago
      > must It's a free country, you're free to be a racist or an anti-theist or a sexist or just about any other -ist. But when your intolerance makes you a legal liability to employers, you'll have yourself to blame. And insofar as you find SQLite's developers intolerable, this is definitely a "you" problem. The vast majority of us don't have a problem with SQLite's developers, they make software that is used by a huge and diverse group of people. This makes your intolerance all the more stark.
- lliamander 4y ago
  It is precisely American Christianity which created the system of religious tolerance and pluralism that we operate under today. And Richard Hipp, while religious, is clearly the farthest thing from a nutcase as you can get. From everything I have seen his behavior indicates that he is calm, rational, thoughtful, and kind.

incomingpain 4y ago

HideousKojima 4y ago
"This document was originally called a "Code of Conduct" and was created for the purpose of filling in a box on "supplier registration" forms submitted to the SQLite developers by some clients." From the very first line of the link.
- incomingpain 4y ago
  Good catch, i glossed over history. Apparently HN wants open source projects to push morality. I am quite downvoted.
  - eitland 4y ago
    Half of HN detest Code of Conduct and that among other things is why we love the what the SQLite team has done here.
    - incomingpain 4y ago
      I detest pretty much all(including sqlite's) codes of conduct. None of them are about getting rid of toxicity but rather exercising power over people. Alas, I have even been flagged by the admins. I must have been really off base with my comment in a way I don't understand.

bitwize 4y ago

A code of conduct that covers all the bases of the gold standard for such things, the Contributor Covenant -- including explicitly promoting DEI, protecting everyone but especially members of marginalized communities from harassment, and delineating explicit enforcement procedures and committees -- is table stakes for an open source project today. Not having one presents compliance issues for companies who otherwise might adopt your project.

zmgsabst 4y ago
> including explicitly promoting DEI > Not having one presents compliance issues for companies who otherwise might adopt your project. Insisting that people adhere to your ideology through “compliance” sounds very totalitarian.
- afavour 4y ago
  It really doesn't. No-one is insisting on anything, really. "If you'd like us to adopt your technology, do X" gives both parties a choice in the matter and total freedom to walk away.
  - lliamander 4y ago
    1. It's creepy that corporations are having expectations about how volunteer effort to create code that they use for free runs itself (or claims to run itself). It's generally not even being made for the corporations that are using it - the software is made for everyone to use (and fork) as they see fit. 2. These corporations are not engaging in this behavior spontaneously. They are responding to a legal regime which is increasingly becoming totalitarian.
    - cryptonector 4y ago
      To be fair this was corporations that actually pay for development of SQLite via the SQLite Consortium.

roblabla 4y ago

This is probably refering the SQLite Code of Ethics debacle. SQLite has a Code of Ethics, which is used for ticking a box when working with some of their clients (meaning: they probably don't take it very seriously). For this code of ethics, they chose to use the christian Rule of St. Benedict[0]. When it was implemented, it ruffled some feathers in a fairly major way. While it's true that SQLite is closed to code contributions, they do still accept discussions on their forums, among other things. Those interactions would, supposedly, be bound to the CoC. The sqlite devs later cleared up that it was there for client compliance reasons, but the damage was done. I don't think this line is in bad faith. It's basically spelled out on their code of ethics page that they basically don't care too much about it and is mostly there for ticking boxes. [0]: https://sqlite.org/codeofethics.html https://sqlite.org/codeofethics.html

mmastrac 4y ago
> This document continues to be used for its original purpose - providing a reference to fill in the "code of conduct" box on supplier registration forms. It seems somewhat deceitful to use this list to check those boxes, which makes this entire page self-contradictory (specific points highlighted): > 24. Do not entertain deceit in your heart. > 28. Utter only truth from heart and mouth. > 39. Be not a grumbler.
- mort96 4y ago
  Where's the deceit? The page is incredibly honest about it, any client which cares will immediately see the purpose of the document. It's working around bureaucracy. Nothing more, nothing less. Given SQLite's position, that's incredibly understandable.
  - mmastrac 4y ago
    Working around bureaucracy is still deceit. The spirit of the ethics they state here would suggest a good faith effort to put together a true code of conduct, however basic. The ethics that Christianity teach don't have a backdoor because it's big corporate.

tantalic 4y ago

> and unlike SQLite, we do not substitute it with an unclear alternative This portion of the statement is harsh, and I think the project could do better by stating what they are doing and why, rather than focusing on what SQLite is doing and why it is bad. I would say that it seems feasible (to me) that SQLite's "Code Of Ethics" works for a small team, open-source, closed-contribution model but wouldn't work for the open-contribution model that libSQL is trying to achieve.

Rebelgecko 4y ago

One of the things I think is really innovative [1] about SQLite's code of conduct is that it's a one-way covenant. The developers are agreeing to act and engage with the community in a certain way without expecting anything in return or enforcing any of their beliefs on others. The rules are also very clearly defined, even the ones I personally don't agree with. I think the new "Contributor Covenant" is a step backwards. It's pages and pages of text to say "don't be a jerk", and the rules are so poorly defined that it isn't much more precise than a one liner saying "don't be a jerk". There's lots of catch-alls like "... And any other unprofessional behavior is against the rules". You could stretch this to cover almost anything. Hell, I've worked in professional settings where wearing shorts was verboten, but I don't think open source projects should be policing how participants dress except in the most extreme circumstances (like if someone shows up to a convention naked when it isn't pre-planned as being a naturist event) I find it confounding that the the new covenant is described as being less vague when it relies on poorly defined terms like "community spaces" and "community leaders". What's a community space? Who are the community leaders? Idk, but I've seen a handful of cases these covenants have been weaponized against developers expressing their personal opinions in a context that has nothing to do with Github. [1]: I know calling it innovative is a bit ironic when most of it was written 1500 years ago, but it's innovative compared to other software projects. (Edited for grammar and to flesh out why I think the new covenant is vaguer despite the author's claim, unlike the old one with well-defined rules)

VancouverMan 4y ago
These days, I find myself feeling far more comfortable and trusting when a software community doesn't have a "code of conduct", and when it doesn't have a "moderation team" or "community leader enforcement". Censorship, or even just the threat of censorship, causes far greater harm to a software community than a small number of thin-skinned people getting "offended" every now and then, usually over trivial and irrelevant matters.
- mschuster91 4y ago
  > Censorship, or even just the threat of censorship, causes far greater harm to a software community than a small number of thin-skinned people getting "offended" every now and then, usually over trivial and irrelevant matters. Projects that do not promise to at least enforce a basic level of civility however lose a potential coder base as well, and that is people who are not "mainstream" and have to fight for survival (all too often literally, even in Western countries) in the meatspace already all day: women, gender-queer, people of color, people of non-Christian religions... last thing they want is toxic gamer bro culture seeping into spaces where they are active. Anecdata, but anyway: I've been on HN for a few years now and very often the lead developers for extremely complex and interesting stuff, particularly reverse engineering, fall under that umbrella somehow. The "free market" shows just exactly where the highest talent classes are, and it's not the whiners whining about CoCs preventing them from spamming "I identify as an Apache helicopter" memes.

devwastaken 4y ago

ReptileMan 4y ago

Sqlite works. I strongly suggest other projects adopting their code of conduct. Seems to deliver awesome results.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

narrator 4y ago

This code of conduct is there to prime the foundation for the takeover of by outsiders. With for profit companies, they can just buy the company. For non-profits, outsiders takeover by instituting DEI and then find something that they can make a big deal out of, or outright lie to get the founders kicked out and take over the organization.

pseudalopex 4y ago

> It seems in bad faith to imply that SQLite is some sort of toxic, anti-diversity space. They said SQLite's code of ethics is unclear. You inferred any other criticism.

glommer 4y ago

it's not nefarious, it's just a different approach to things. I think Hipp is justified in all he is doing, and I don't think he is necessarily wrong. We just see things differently

adamgordonbell 4y ago
Fair enough, It could be read that way. I get frustrated that the code of ethics gets so much attention of sqlite, in a bike shed type of way. But by mentioning that, I think I've drawn even more attention to it. My bad.

mackal 4y ago

e44858 4y ago
[Citation needed]
how_rude 4y ago
How rude.
MichaelCollins 4y ago
Intolerance towards religion is toxic and anti-diversity. In America, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 makes discriminating against people because of their religion illegal in many contexts. If you can't work alongside somebody who is religious, then you become a liability to any corporation that respects this law.
- mackal 4y ago
  Why must I be tolerant towards the intolerant?
  - MichaelCollins 4y ago
    > must It's a free country, you're free to be a racist or an anti-theist or a sexist or just about any other -ist. But when your intolerance makes you a legal liability to employers, you'll have yourself to blame. And insofar as you find SQLite's developers intolerable, this is definitely a "you" problem. The vast majority of us don't have a problem with SQLite's developers, they make software that is used by a huge and diverse group of people. This makes your intolerance all the more stark.
lliamander 4y ago
It is precisely American Christianity which created the system of religious tolerance and pluralism that we operate under today. And Richard Hipp, while religious, is clearly the farthest thing from a nutcase as you can get. From everything I have seen his behavior indicates that he is calm, rational, thoughtful, and kind.