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

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sun, 4 Nov 2018 11:35:56 +0100
From:   Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To:     Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>
Cc:     neil@...wn.name, mishi@...ux.com,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        ksummit-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] Call to Action Re: [PATCH 0/7] Code of Conduct:
 Fix some wording, and add an interpretation document

Hi Josh,

On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 2:16 PM Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 07:26:06AM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 21 2018, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 08:20:11AM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
> > >> I call on you, Greg:
> > >>  - to abandon this divisive attempt to impose a "Code of Conduct"
> > >>  - to revert 8a104f8b5867c68
> > >>  - to return to your core competence of building a great team around
> > >>    a great kernel
> > >>
> > >>  #Isupportreversion
> > >>
> > >> I call on the community to consider what *does* need to be said, about
> > >> conduct, to people outside the community and who have recently joined.
> > >> What is the document that you would have liked to have read as you were
> > >> starting out?  It is all too long ago for me to remember clearly, and so
> > >> much has changed.
> > >
> > > The document I would have liked to have read when starting out is
> > > currently checked into the source tree in
> > > Documentation/process/code-of-conduct.rst .
> >
> > I'm curious - what would you have gained by reading that document?
>
> I would have then had rather less of a pervasive feeling of "if I make
> even a single mistake I get made an example of in ways that will feed
> people's quotes files for years to come".
>
> See
> https://hbr.org/2017/08/high-performing-teams-need-psychological-safety-heres-how-to-create-it
> for more on the benefits of that.

Funny how you post a link to that article ;-)
Because the psychological safety of the Linux kernel developers and
maintainers is exactly what is being affected, due to the atmosphere
surrounding this particular CoC.

While the addition of the CoC Clarification did improve the general
understanding, the addition of the CoC itself has already caused a
chilling effect. From chatting at the conferences in Edinburgh, people
do have concerns and comments, but many just do not want to express
their thoughts and feelings in public...

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds