On Monday 03 April 2006 22:19, Grant Goodyear wrote: > Vapier wrote: [Mon Apr 03 2006, 04:38:48PM CDT] > > > dont get me wrong, i hate documenting common sense as much as the next > > sane guy, but it seems Gentoo has come to the point where this needs to > > be done > > Actually, I disagree that it "needs to be done".
if it wasnt needed we wouldnt be watching devs depart because they were tired of dealing with shit/politics/butt sex > Once upon a time I > helped plasmaroo craft parts of our etiquette guide, but at the time I > assumed that it was a guide to help the clueless, not a rigid code that how is it rigid ? it's basically "dont be a dick" in longer winded terms > we would be putting in place (and under which one could be prosecuted). huh ? if you're referring to the trailing infra paragraphs, please disregard those and consider the document again. otherwise i have no idea what you mean by "prosecuted" > > many thanks to the Ubuntu guys and to solar for doing the real work here: > > http://dev.gentoo.org/~solar/xml/conduct.html > > Um, do we have permission from the authors? Some of the sentences seem > to be word-for-word identical to the source. we'll ask them tomorrow at the ubuntu booth in LWE > Incidentally, why drop the part about leaving the project in a considerate > manner? we can add it back in if people like. ideally, you wouldnt want to leave us. JOIN US. > > i dont see how anyone can be against this (unless you're a terrorist!), > > so this is on track to be integrated as-is into the dev handbook > > Etiquette section > > A few points: The "be collaborative" stanza echoes our social policy, > so it's not clear that it's needed here. it is a bit redundant but this is one point i like hammering into people. i'm tired of seeing projects *cough* FreeBSD *cough* that patch their packages to hell and rarely try to contribute back. if redundancy hammers a point home, this is a pretty good point to do so with imo. > In any event, if we plan to > use this document to extend or otherwise clarify our social policy, then > I tend to think that does deserve some discussion. that's why i started a thread instead of simply committing it > As for the bit about > "disruptive behaviors" being "a security and stability threat to > Gentoo", I assume that's Solar's contribution? please consider the doc without those infra related paragraphs as they are unrelated to a proper code of conduct -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
