On 4 Jul 2016, at 12:27, Renato Golin via Openmp-dev <openmp-...@lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On 4 July 2016 at 00:42, Robinson, Paul <paul.robin...@sony.com> wrote: >> Daniel claimed it was not different, even though he proposed the text. >> I think it is better, as "egregious" (even though it is qualitative) >> helps identify what "rare" circumstances would come under the policy. >> As a non-lawyer I do think it's different. > > I personally agree with you, both on helping identify "rare" (as what, > not when), and for easing non-lawyers minds.
The simplest solution would probably be to have a separate advisory document listing informally examples of things that would and wouldn’t be covered by the CoC. For example: Stalking a member of the LLVM community: Covered. Inciting harassment of a member of the LLVM community in social media: Covered Sending rude emails to a member of the LLVM community with whom you have a relationship outside of the project: Probably not covered, unless it’s directly related to LLVM Some example that people are worried would constitute overreach: Not covered Some other examples that people are concerned must be covered: Covered This document would provide guidance for the CoC enforcement committee, but would not be part of the official CoC. David
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
