3 ms·

I think this CoC nonsense makes me far less likely to contribute to the kernel. CoC's should be nothing more than "Don't be a jerk, and keep it constructive". K

by xedrac 2y ago

I think this CoC nonsense makes me far less likely to contribute to the kernel. CoC's should be nothing more than "Don't be a jerk, and keep it constructive". Kent's interaction in that one instance was jerk-ish for sure. But the last thing we need is some big brother committee bringing down the hammer of shame on key maintainers. Let them have their heated technical arguments. How about we try and not be so easily offended by everything?

cmxch 2y ago
Which actually works quite well for places like OpenBSD. The lack of a star chamber CoC puts the focus on writing good code.
taeric 2y ago
I'm torn. I think having a stated code of conduct is fine. I also think moderation is good. Works well here, as an example. But, it is done very directly here with no hiding behind process. I get that things can be harder in other context. But will never agree with personal messages on behalf of a committee, I don't think. And for the apologies, that is silly. Would be akin to someone getting a citation being responsible to say sorry. Ideally, you want people to feel the need to do that on their own. At young ages, it is understandable to try and teach the formalities of apologies. But, as a formal policy, it robs apologies of any real meaning.
- arp242 2y ago
  I guess the thing that bothers me that this is mainly a personal conflict between two people. And now some "committee" is butting in a month and a half later – I don't know, I'm not sure that's helpful. Kent is obviously well-intentioned and acting in good faith. He is also rather difficult to the point where I wouldn't be surprised to see bcachefs removed from the kernel at some point. It seems to me that mediation and help to deal with his attitude would be far more constructive and appropriate, not punishment. I suppose that sums up why I don't care too much for the CoC stuff: it's too much focused on "punishment", and typically results in a committee deciding who is and isn't deserving of it.

by xedrac 2y ago

cmxch 2y ago

Which actually works quite well for places like OpenBSD. The lack of a star chamber CoC puts the focus on writing good code.

taeric 2y ago

I'm torn. I think having a stated code of conduct is fine. I also think moderation is good. Works well here, as an example. But, it is done very directly here with no hiding behind process. I get that things can be harder in other context. But will never agree with personal messages on behalf of a committee, I don't think. And for the apologies, that is silly. Would be akin to someone getting a citation being responsible to say sorry. Ideally, you want people to feel the need to do that on their own. At young ages, it is understandable to try and teach the formalities of apologies. But, as a formal policy, it robs apologies of any real meaning.

arp242 2y ago
I guess the thing that bothers me that this is mainly a personal conflict between two people. And now some "committee" is butting in a month and a half later – I don't know, I'm not sure that's helpful. Kent is obviously well-intentioned and acting in good faith. He is also rather difficult to the point where I wouldn't be surprised to see bcachefs removed from the kernel at some point. It seems to me that mediation and help to deal with his attitude would be far more constructive and appropriate, not punishment. I suppose that sums up why I don't care too much for the CoC stuff: it's too much focused on "punishment", and typically results in a committee deciding who is and isn't deserving of it.