Re: Add Code of Conduct [Another RFC or not now?]

On Sat, Feb 08, 2020 at 11:41:11PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote: > Graham Percival writes: > > Within 2-3 weeks, I had squandered all of the good feelings and energy > > sparked from that meeting. I view that as my worst blunder from all > > my years of involvement with LilyPond. > > Hey, I had ch

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Because of significant disagreement, and to ensure that LilyPond contributors don't feel pushed, I am hereby officially withdrawing this proposal. I apologize for the disturbance caused by the way I have introduced this. Maybe I'll submit a revised proposal, but if I do, I'll definitely start with

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

niedz., 9 lut 2020 o 00:31 napisał(a): > On 2020/02/08 22:57:13, janek wrote: > > Because of significant disagreement, and to ensure that LilyPond > contributors > > don't feel pushed, I am hereby officially withdrawing this proposal. I > apologize > > for the disturbance caused by the way I have

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

On 2020/02/08 22:57:13, janek wrote: > Because of significant disagreement, and to ensure that LilyPond contributors > don't feel pushed, I am hereby officially withdrawing this proposal. I apologize > for the disturbance caused by the way I have introduced this. > > Maybe I'll submit a revised pr

Re: Add Code of Conduct [Another RFC or not now?]

Graham, sob., 8 lut 2020 o 21:23 Graham Percival napisał(a): > I don't have any reasons that haven't been mentioned already, > other than one meta-reason: proposals like this are very divisive. > Trying to have this discussion in the middle of a "final sprint > towards 2.20" was unfortunate. >

Re: Add Code of Conduct

James, first, I am sorry that you are so disturbed. I realize that this is partially my fault, so I apologize. sob., 8 lut 2020 o 09:23 James Lowe napisał(a): > On 07/02/2020 09:50, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: > > Thanks for your careful observations. > > > > First, the CoC was actually coined by M

Re: Add Code of Conduct

Thomas Morley writes: > Am Sa., 8. Feb. 2020 um 14:59 Uhr schrieb Kieren MacMillan > : > >> To me, the greatest shame is that all the positive energy and >> momentum coming out of the Salzburg conference is, it seems, in real >> danger of being shut down by toxic energy of the same kind that has

Re: Add Code of Conduct

niedz., 9 lut 2020 o 00:39 David Kastrup napisał(a): > David Kastrup writes: > > > Janek Warchoł writes: > > > >> Elaine, > >> > >> pt., 7 lut 2020 o 02:28 Flaming Hakama by Elaine < > ela...@flaminghakama.com> > >> napisał(a): > >> > >>> 1) "Adopt this CoC or I will leave the community" Such

Re: Add Code of Conduct

+1 to everything Harm said, and big thanks to Werner! (and Urs, who co-organized Salzburg event) Janek sob., 8 lut 2020 o 16:52 Thomas Morley napisał(a): > Am Sa., 8. Feb. 2020 um 14:59 Uhr schrieb Kieren MacMillan > : > > > To me, the greatest shame is that all the positive energy and momentum

Re: Add Code of Conduct

David Kastrup writes: > Janek Warchoł writes: > >> Elaine, >> >> pt., 7 lut 2020 o 02:28 Flaming Hakama by Elaine >> napisał(a): >> >>> 1) "Adopt this CoC or I will leave the community" Such threats amount to a >>> my-way-or-the-highway attitude, which is an attempt to enforce veto power >>> i

Re: Add Code of Conduct

Janek Warchoł writes: > Elaine, > > pt., 7 lut 2020 o 02:28 Flaming Hakama by Elaine > napisał(a): > >> 1) "Adopt this CoC or I will leave the community" Such threats amount to a >> my-way-or-the-highway attitude, which is an attempt to enforce veto power >> in what is supposed to be a collabor

Re: Add Code of Conduct

Elaine, pt., 7 lut 2020 o 02:28 Flaming Hakama by Elaine napisał(a): > 1) "Adopt this CoC or I will leave the community" Such threats amount to a > my-way-or-the-highway attitude, which is an attempt to enforce veto power > in what is supposed to be a collaborative / concensus / democratic > ap

Re: Add Code of Conduct [Another RFC or not now?]

Graham Percival writes: > On Sat, Feb 08, 2020 at 07:21:30PM +, Trevor wrote: >> Phil Holmes wrote 08/02/2020 17:24:56 >> Subject: Re: Add Code of Conduct [Another RFC or not now?] >> >> > - Original Message - From: "Karlin High" > >

Re: Add Code of Conduct [Another RFC or not now?]

On Sat, Feb 08, 2020 at 07:21:30PM +, Trevor wrote: > Phil Holmes wrote 08/02/2020 17:24:56 > Subject: Re: Add Code of Conduct [Another RFC or not now?] > > > - Original Message - From: "Karlin High" > > However, I'd like to hear from David

Re: Add Code of Conduct [Another RFC or not now?]

Trevor writes: > Phil Holmes wrote 08/02/2020 17:24:56 > Subject: Re: Add Code of Conduct [Another RFC or not now?] > >>- Original Message - From: "Karlin High" >>However, I'd like to hear from David Kastrup and James Lowe >> first. To me, th

Re: Add Code of Conduct [Another RFC or not now?]

Karlin High writes: > On 2/8/2020 11:24 AM, Phil Holmes wrote: >> I remain strongly opposed to a CoC. > > Clearly noted; thanks for responding. I have nothing further to say on > this topic just now; it's pretty much all been covered in prior > messages. > > I'm sorry if I got your name wrong. I

Re: Add Code of Conduct [Another RFC or not now?]

pkx1...@posteo.net writes: > Anyway to answer Karlin's request, I am probably the last person in > the 'dev' team to worry about. Yes I seem to do a lot of 'work' but it > *is* just 'janitorial' duties (which is a rather good way to explain > it) and, assuming we do manage to get the automation su

Re: Add Code of Conduct [Another RFC or not now?]

Hi Karlin, > In my opinion, positive things have indeed come out of these threads. They > may not be what any one person had in mind, but that's to be expected > whenever a community discusses something. That’s exactly what I was going to say. =) Best, Kieren.

Re: Add Code of Conduct [Another RFC or not now?]

On 2/8/2020 12:46 PM, pkx1...@posteo.net wrote: then something positive would have come out of this CoC thread after all. Thanks for your response; clearly noted. Phil Holmes makes builds. James Lowe manages issue and patch reviews. Hopefully I can remember this. In my opinion, positive thi

Re: Add Code of Conduct [Another RFC or not now?]

On 08/02/2020 17:50, Werner LEMBERG wrote: GNU Kind Communication Guidelines To-may-to, To-mah-to Werner. Anyway to answer Karlin's request, I am probably the last person in the 'dev' team to worry about. Yes I seem to do a lot of 'work' but it *is* just 'janitorial' duties (which is a rathe

Re: Add Code of Conduct [Another RFC or not now?]

Am 8. Februar 2020 19:23:34 MEZ schrieb Karlin High : >On 2/8/2020 11:24 AM, Phil Holmes wrote: >> I remain strongly opposed to a CoC. > >Clearly noted; thanks for responding. I have nothing further to say on >this topic just now; it's pretty much all been covered in prior >messages. > >I'm sor

Re: Add Code of Conduct [Another RFC or not now?]

On 2/8/2020 11:24 AM, Phil Holmes wrote: I remain strongly opposed to a CoC. Clearly noted; thanks for responding. I have nothing further to say on this topic just now; it's pretty much all been covered in prior messages. I'm sorry if I got your name wrong. I know "Phil Holmes" and "James L

Re: Add Code of Conduct [Another RFC or not now?]

- Original Message - From: "Werner LEMBERG" To: Cc: ; ; ; ; Sent: Saturday, February 08, 2020 5:50 PM Subject: Re: Add Code of Conduct [Another RFC or not now?] However, I'd like to hear from David Kastrup and James Lowe first. To me, their opposition re

Re: Add Code of Conduct [Another RFC or not now?]

On 2/8/20, 10:55 AM, "lilypond-devel on behalf of David Kastrup" wrote: Werner LEMBERG writes: >>> However, I'd like to hear from David Kastrup and James Lowe >>> first. To me, their opposition registered as the strongest. >> >> I remain strongly opposed to a CoC.

Re: Add Code of Conduct [Another RFC or not now?]

Werner LEMBERG writes: >>> However, I'd like to hear from David Kastrup and James Lowe >>> first. To me, their opposition registered as the strongest. >> >> I remain strongly opposed to a CoC. > > Hmm. What about simply using the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines, > maybe adding 'LilyPond' at s

Re: Add Code of Conduct [Another RFC or not now?]

>> However, I'd like to hear from David Kastrup and James Lowe >> first. To me, their opposition registered as the strongest. > > I remain strongly opposed to a CoC. Hmm. What about simply using the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines, maybe adding 'LilyPond' at some strategic places? Wern

Re: Add Code of Conduct [Another RFC or not now?]

- Original Message - From: "Karlin High" However, I'd like to hear from David Kastrup and James Lowe first. To me, their opposition registered as the strongest. I remain strongly opposed to a CoC. -- Phil Holmes

Re: Add Code of Conduct

Am Samstag, den 08.02.2020, 17:52 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup: > Urs Liska writes: > > > Am Samstag, den 08.02.2020, 17:31 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup: > > > Thomas Morley writes: > > > > > > > P.S. that 'make test-baseline' failed, I'll need to investigate > > > > after > > > > sending this. >

Re: Add Code of Conduct

Urs Liska writes: > Am Samstag, den 08.02.2020, 17:31 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup: >> Thomas Morley writes: >> >> > P.S. that 'make test-baseline' failed, I'll need to investigate >> > after >> > sending this. >> > >> > >> >> input/regression/display-lily-tests.ly:230:1: fatal error: Test >>

Re: Add Code of Conduct

Am Samstag, den 08.02.2020, 17:31 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup: > Thomas Morley writes: > > > P.S. that 'make test-baseline' failed, I'll need to investigate > > after > > sending this. > > > > > > input/regression/display-lily-tests.ly:230:1: fatal error: Test > unequal: BUG. > in = \applyOut

Re: Add Code of Conduct

Thomas Morley writes: > P.S. that 'make test-baseline' failed, I'll need to investigate after > sending this. > > input/regression/display-lily-tests.ly:230:1: fatal error: Test unequal: BUG. in = \applyOutput Foo #(lambda (arg) (list)) out = \applyOutput Foo ##f \test ##[ \applyOutput Foo #(

Re: Add Code of Conduct

Kieren MacMillan writes: > Hi Harm, > > Fair points, all. > >> Again a big, big THANK YOU to Werner and all who made it possible!! > > +1! Major seconded. >> Not going into details of the CoC-discussion, why not handle it as what it >> is: >> It's a patch. Review showed there are too many obje

Re: Add Code of Conduct

Hi Harm, Fair points, all. > Again a big, big THANK YOU to Werner and all who made it possible!! +1! > Not going into details of the CoC-discussion, why not handle it as what it is: > It's a patch. Review showed there are too many objections. Thus it > should be set to 'needs work' or 'waiting'

Re: Add Code of Conduct

Thomas Morley writes: > Although my time is very limited during the usual workingweek, I'd > love to do more on the guile-v2-thingy or at least doing tests for the > already done work, etc. Instead I write this mail (okay, a 'make > test-baseline' runs in the background) or read through very long

Re: Add Code of Conduct [Another RFC or not now?]

On 2/8/2020 9:17 AM, David Kastrup wrote: I've proposed looking at the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines as something that one can point to and aim to heed. . It has certainly worthwhile advice. Thanks for the link. I saw it earlier, want

Re: Add Code of Conduct

Am Sa., 8. Feb. 2020 um 14:59 Uhr schrieb Kieren MacMillan : > To me, the greatest shame is that all the positive energy and momentum coming > out of the Salzburg conference is, it seems, in real danger of being shut > down by toxic energy of the same kind that has led to the community attrition

Re: Add Code of Conduct [Another RFC or not now?]

Karlin High writes: > I think the Code of Conduct discussion is reaching (or has reached) > the point of exhaustion and is unlikely to be productive if continued > further in current directions. It seems there is pretty strong > opposition to adopting the Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct as

Re: Add Code of Conduct [Another RFC or not now?]

I think the Code of Conduct discussion is reaching (or has reached) the point of exhaustion and is unlikely to be productive if continued further in current directions. It seems there is pretty strong opposition to adopting the Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct as originally proposed. I'm

Re: Add Code of Conduct

Hi James, > What a shame. To me, the greatest shame is that all the positive energy and momentum coming out of the Salzburg conference is, it seems, in real danger of being shut down by toxic energy of the same kind that has led to the community attrition over the last 5-7 years. Just an obse

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Hi Wol, > The worry is that said developer may decide his talents > are better spent elsewhere, and he'll quit ... We need to weigh that concert against the documented reality that multiple other developers have already done so, and the worry that more might follow (or never join in the first p

Re: Add Code of Conduct

On 07/02/2020 09:50, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: Thanks for your careful observations. First, the CoC was actually coined by Mike, and I saw it as a proposal to bring LilyPond into the next decade. What is that even supposed to mean? Again empty, ]words that sound 'nice' but mean nothing. A Co

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Wols Lists writes: > On 06/02/20 20:56, Carl Sorensen wrote: >> >> I think that you are overstating things a little bit. I recommend >> that if you choose to use such a signature, it would be better to >> say "My replies are known to sometimes cause friction. This is >> unintentional. To help

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

On 06/02/20 20:56, Carl Sorensen wrote: > > > On 2/6/20, 1:46 PM, "lilypond-devel on behalf of David Kastrup" > > wrote: > > > > > Apple carts unfortunately get upset once in a while. That is just life. > > Well, one can make them more robust, and that may be worth thinking

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Karlin High writes: > On 2/6/2020 2:45 PM, David Kastrup wrote: >> I am working on an Email signature that might be helping to convey the >> message. > > Nice idea, but sometimes drawing attention to a problem only makes > things worse. How about focusing on the success mode instead of the > fai

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

On 06/02/20 14:40, Kieren MacMillan wrote: > Hi James, > >> I am still struggling to understand the point of a COC for the LP project, >> other than some kind of ... what is the term ... virtue signalling or >> something that a project does *after* someone says something that happens to >> be o

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Karlin High writes: > On 2/6/2020 2:45 PM, David Kastrup wrote: >> I am working on an Email signature that might be helping to convey the >> message. > > Nice idea, but sometimes drawing attention to a problem only makes > things worse. How about focusing on the success mode instead of the > fai

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 2:55 AM David Kastrup wrote: > Thomas Morley writes: > > > As an example look at the review of one of my own patches > > https://codereview.appspot.com/270640043 > > Quoting dak: > > "This looks like a total mess." > > "Total waste of effort." > > "Aaand another one." > >

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 1:05 AM Karlin High wrote: > On 2/6/2020 2:45 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > > I am working on an Email signature that might be helping to convey the > > message. > > Nice idea, but sometimes drawing attention to a problem only makes > things worse. How about focusing on the su

Re: Add Code of Conduct

Thanks for your careful observations. First, the CoC was actually coined by Mike, and I saw it as a proposal to bring LilyPond into the next decade. A CoC is a pretty normal concept these days. If having a CoC is required to be taken seriously by developers at large, we should consider it. I conce

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Il giorno gio 6 feb 2020 alle 23:04, Carl Sorensen ha scritto: I think that the presence (in the proposed CoC )of an enforcement committee that has the power to sanction participants in response to anonymous complaints is more than just a bit of prose. It's the creation of a new structure tha

Re: Add Code of Conduct

On 2/6/20, 6:28 PM, "lilypond-devel on behalf of Flaming Hakama by Elaine" wrote: Regarding the CoC. If there is no enforcement, then it is not clear what is the point. Perhaps the point is to provide a support system, so that somebody who feels marginalized has others on their

Re: Add Code of Conduct

Hi Elaine, > * The current process relies too heavily on one contributor, and any > improvements to the process will inherently invovle untangling the many > hats being worn by the current BDFL, such that others can wear them--and > probably also reconstituting the hat wardrobe. > > * Those who c

Re: Add Code of Conduct

Regarding the CoC. If there is no enforcement, then it is not clear what is the point. In the abstract, such a document could help to set expectations of behavior, including clarifying types of behavior that is considered unacceptable. Such that everyone/anyone in the community would be able to

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

On 2/6/2020 2:45 PM, David Kastrup wrote: I am working on an Email signature that might be helping to convey the message. Nice idea, but sometimes drawing attention to a problem only makes things worse. How about focusing on the success mode instead of the failure mode? " I aim to communica

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

On 2/6/20, 3:03 PM, "lilypond-devel on behalf of kieren_macmillan kieren_macmillan" wrote: We lost at least 30 [!!] person-years of extremely high-level programming assistance because of the past tone in this community — yes, I can justify that claim with concrete data — an

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Hi James (et al.), > Goodness gracious! > Do all those who feel so positive about CoCs not see how that paragraph > above is just so bloody soul destroying? No. Please explain. > I don't need a document written by a committee of people that I have no > say over (i.e. what we do in the real wor

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

On 2/6/20, 1:46 PM, "lilypond-devel on behalf of David Kastrup" wrote: > > Apple carts unfortunately get upset once in a while. That is just life. Well, one can make them more robust, and that may be worth thinking about. -- David Kastrup My replies are

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

On 06/02/2020 15:37, David Kastrup wrote: Werner LEMBERG writes: I'd like to recommend that everyone argues with him [David K.], if you think he is wrong. Otherwise take his posts literal and _not_ offending. That's it. But new contributors cannot be expected to know, and also it takes time

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

James Lowe writes: > On 06/02/2020 15:37, David Kastrup wrote: >> Werner LEMBERG writes: >> I'd like to recommend that everyone argues with him [David K.], if you think he is wrong. Otherwise take his posts literal and _not_ offending. >>> That's it. >> But new contributors canno

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Werner LEMBERG writes: >> I'd like to recommend that everyone argues with him [David K.], if >> you think he is wrong. Otherwise take his posts literal and _not_ >> offending. > > That's it. But new contributors cannot be expected to know, and also it takes time until the emotional response ali

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Hi David, > No, the problem is that this solution to the problems of bad actors > addresses a problem that we do not have to a relevant degree. At least > I hope we can agree that my intent is not doling out damage to the > project. Your original quote >>> The problem with an approach focused o

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

> I'd like to recommend that everyone argues with him [David K.], if > you think he is wrong. Otherwise take his posts literal and _not_ > offending. That's it. Werner

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Kieren MacMillan writes: > Hi David, > >> The problem with an approach focused on punishment and expulsion is that >> it helps isolating and eventually ostracizing bad actors, limiting the >> total damage they may cause. > > "Limiting the total damage they may cause" is a "problem"? You > definit

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Hi David, > The problem with an approach focused on punishment and expulsion is that > it helps isolating and eventually ostracizing bad actors, limiting the > total damage they may cause. "Limiting the total damage they may cause" is a "problem"? You definitely have me confused on that one. ;)

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Kieren MacMillan writes: > Hi James, > >> I am still struggling to understand the point of a COC for the LP >> project, other than some kind of ... what is the term ... virtue >> signalling or something that a project does *after* someone says >> something that happens to be offensive to someone

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Hi Karlin, > I've been following Lilypond mailing lists since 2016 or so. I'd > describe my most common role as "entry-level tech support," answering > the most basic mailing list questions so better-skilled people don't > have to deal with them. That "job" is going on my list. :) > I can point

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Hi James, > I am still struggling to understand the point of a COC for the LP project, > other than some kind of ... what is the term ... virtue signalling or > something that a project does *after* someone says something that happens to > be offensive to someone else - which is just, life isn'

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

David Kastrup ezt írta (időpont: 2020. febr. 6., Cs, 14:38): > > Benkő Pál writes: > > > Janek Warchoł ezt írta (időpont: 2020. > > febr. 6., Cs, 0:32): > >> > >> I'll try to speak only on the most pressing points to avoid bloating the > >> discussion unnecessarily. > >> > >> I stopped contribut

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Benkő Pál writes: > Janek Warchoł ezt írta (időpont: 2020. > febr. 6., Cs, 0:32): >> >> I'll try to speak only on the most pressing points to avoid bloating the >> discussion unnecessarily. >> >> I stopped contributing to LilyPond about 6 years ago. One cause of that >> change was that I got a j

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Janek Warchoł ezt írta (időpont: 2020. febr. 6., Cs, 0:32): > > I'll try to speak only on the most pressing points to avoid bloating the > discussion unnecessarily. > > I stopped contributing to LilyPond about 6 years ago. One cause of that > change was that I got a job and suddenly had much less

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Hello, I am still struggling to understand the point of a COC for the LP project, other than some kind of ... what is the term ... virtue signalling or something that a project does *after* someone says something that happens to be offensive to someone else - which is just, life isn't it? R

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Werner, czw., 6 lut 2020, 03:46 użytkownik Werner LEMBERG napisał: > > > The preamble and intent is one thing; adding a corrective committee > > with the authority to enact punishments based on anonymous reports > > is another. It implements hierarchies and institutions exerting > > coercive po

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

David, czw., 6 lut 2020, 02:55 użytkownik David Kastrup napisał: > Not everybody likes to argue. So yes, I felt in a comfortable space > with you and it was a productive exchange where I was not aware of any > potential for controversy. But I'll agree that it sends an awful > message to bystan

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Let me write a clarification and a disclaimer. It was not the purpose of my email to blame people. If someone (especially David) felt attacked, I apologize. I wanted to express how I view the situation, and I may be mistaken in my opinions. I don't claim to hold the objective truth. czw., 6 lut 20

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

On Feb 5, 2020, at 20:26, Thomas Morley wrote: > So to repeat myself, everyone should take his post literal, not offending! > > I'd love to see a community bearing different personalities, even > personalities with problematic conversation skills. > For me it's like strange english from a non-na

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

I've been following Lilypond mailing lists since 2016 or so. I'd describe my most common role as "entry-level tech support," answering the most basic mailing list questions so better-skilled people don't have to deal with them. I can point to the exact thread(s) that drew me into the Lilypond comm

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

David, > [...] the principal impact to be expected on LilyPond development > appears to have an official body entitled to censure my behavior and > eventually, out of a sense of duty, remove me. I won't definitely do that. > The general stance of the GNU project on its internal lists is to >

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

[Being on the return from Hawaii I'm late with everything, so please don't be surprised if I answer to stuff that has already been discussed to death.] > The preamble and intent is one thing; adding a corrective committee > with the authority to enact punishments based on anonymous reports > i

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Am Do., 6. Feb. 2020 um 02:55 Uhr schrieb David Kastrup : > > Thomas Morley writes: > > I'd like to recommend that everyone argues with him, if you think he is > > wrong. > > Otherwise take his posts literal and _not_ offending. > > Not everybody likes to argue. So yes, I felt in a comfortable

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Thomas Morley writes: > As an example look at the review of one of my own patches > https://codereview.appspot.com/270640043 > Quoting dak: > "This looks like a total mess." > "Total waste of effort." > "Aaand another one." Ouch. Fortunately in context this looks less dire ("Aaand another one."

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 7:37 PM Thomas Morley wrote: > > Hi all, > > Being on the lists for many years now I remember only a few posts > which were inappropriate: > > Long time ago. there was a user with a post others felt uncomfortable > with. But Graham denied a problem. But there was a followup

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Hi all, Being on the lists for many years now I remember only a few posts which were inappropriate: Long time ago. there was a user with a post others felt uncomfortable with. But Graham denied a problem. But there was a followup which definitely was. And Graham told the user that it was not appr

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

śr., 5 lut 2020 o 23:47 Kieren MacMillan napisał(a): > I guess what confuses me about this whole discussion/thread — starting > with the Salzburg "roundtable", really — is how quickly it appears to > escalate from "let’s collaboratively design an ecosystem where everyone can > be in their Zone(s)

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

I'll try to speak only on the most pressing points to avoid bloating the discussion unnecessarily. śr., 5 lut 2020 o 14:41 David Kastrup napisał(a): > Janek Warchoł writes: > > In short, it's been found (I think Mike will be able to give you specific > > examples) that having code of conduct en

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Hi David (et al.), > I am afraid that to some degree I am oblivious of > out-of-line behavior unless it hits me in the face. Which simply means that calling other people in on potentially problematic behaviour shouldn’t fall under your job description. No biggie! > There are multiple factors at

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Kieren MacMillan writes: > Here are my thoughts, in stream-of-consciousness order: > > 1. There were times ca. 2014–2017 (which was a rather tough time in my > life) in which my list behaviour should certainly have triggered an > "issue" under any reasonably-constructed CoC. Looking back, I wish

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Hi all, I was just lurking, but now feel I should comment. Here are my thoughts, in stream-of-consciousness order: 1. There were times ca. 2014–2017 (which was a rather tough time in my life) in which my list behaviour should certainly have triggered an "issue" under any reasonably-constructed

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

David Kastrup writes: > Yes. Even given better communication by my side. If there are obvious > recipes to follow to place and extend and use one's own plugin package, > and if one so desires, submit it in a manner where other users may > install it on-demand, I hope that the option to abandon

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Urs Liska writes: > Am Mittwoch, den 05.02.2020, 21:21 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup: >> Urs Liska writes: >> >> > I must say that I haven't actually expressed an opinion about it so >> > far, and I don't know which I have. >> > >> > I don't feel uncomfortable without and wouldn't mind adding it

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Am Mittwoch, den 05.02.2020, 21:21 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup: > Urs Liska writes: > > > Am 5. Februar 2020 20:08:28 MEZ schrieb > > nine.fierce.ball...@gmail.com: > > > On 2020/02/05 18:17:25, c_sorensen wrote: > > > > I recognize that Mike Solomon has a different opinion. I mean > > > > no >

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

om" Cc: "lilypond-devel@gnu.org" , "re...@codereview-hr.appspotmail.com" Subject: Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com) On 2020/02/05 18:17:25, c_sorensen wrote: That's a really good point and I see where Carl and David N are coming from

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

"Phil Holmes" writes: > I've kept out of this debate for a long time because a) I've only been > peripherally involved lately and b) there's been too much > communication for me to read, but > > As one of the earlier regular committers, and as the only person who > makes builds and updates the we

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Urs Liska writes: > Am 5. Februar 2020 20:08:28 MEZ schrieb nine.fierce.ball...@gmail.com: >>On 2020/02/05 18:17:25, c_sorensen wrote: >>> I recognize that Mike Solomon has a different opinion. I mean no >>disrespect to >>> Mike, Janek, Han-Wen, or any other member of the LilyPond team. I >>hig

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

- Original Message - From: To: ; ; ; ; ; ; ; Cc: ; Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2020 7:08 PM Subject: Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com) On 2020/02/05 18:17:25, c_sorensen wrote: I recognize that Mike Solomon has a different opinion. I mean

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Am 5. Februar 2020 20:08:28 MEZ schrieb nine.fierce.ball...@gmail.com: >On 2020/02/05 18:17:25, c_sorensen wrote: >> I recognize that Mike Solomon has a different opinion. I mean no >disrespect to >> Mike, Janek, Han-Wen, or any other member of the LilyPond team. I >highly value >> the team sp

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

On 2020/02/05 18:17:25, c_sorensen wrote: > I recognize that Mike Solomon has a different opinion. I mean no disrespect to > Mike, Janek, Han-Wen, or any other member of the LilyPond team. I highly value > the team spirit of the LilyPond team. >Well said. Here's the current tally as I understan

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

On 2020/02/05 18:17:25, c_sorensen wrote: > I recognize that Mike Solomon has a different opinion. I mean no disrespect to > Mike, Janek, Han-Wen, or any other member of the LilyPond team. I highly value > the team spirit of the LilyPond team. Well said. Here's the current tally as I understand

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

On 2020/02/05 18:17:25, c_sorensen wrote: > > On 2/5/20, 7:40 AM, "lilypond-devel on behalf of David Kastrup" > > wrote: > > Mike Solomon writes: > > > Janek Warcho

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

On 2/5/20, 7:40 AM, "lilypond-devel on behalf of David Kastrup" wrote: Mike Solomon writes: > Janek Warchoł writes: > >> Hi, >> >> śr., 5 lut 2020, 00:34 użytkownik napisał: >> >>> What problem are we trying to solve here? >>> >> >> In shor

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Mike Solomon writes: > Mike Solomon writes: > >>> What does "implement" mean? >> >> Sorry, I wasn't clear. I meant merge the PR. > >> Uh, words have meanings. There would be no point of putting something > into our documentation that we are not going to follow through with. > > By merging it, t

  1   2   >