From:
Rich Persaud <persaur@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Friday, 16 August 2019 at 16:49
To: George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Lars Kurth <lars.kurth@xxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "minios-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <minios-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "mirageos-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <mirageos-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "win-pv-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx"
<win-pv-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "committers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <committers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC] Code of Conduct
Thanks for the detailed response. Lars noted that the proposed Xen CoC is nearly identical to Contributor Covenant, which has been adopted by many organizations, including teams at Intel and Google. My comment,
from https://lists.gt.net/xen/devel/561686#561686
Without getting into the merits of Contributor Covenant, there is value in reusing an "upstream CoC" that has been vetted by many organizations and is being continually tested in the real world.
Similar to the "macro supply chain" topic: if Xen Project must make changes to the upstream CoC, these can be done as a logical patch (rather than an orphaned fork) so we can incorporate upstream improvements.
The rationale for each diff against the upstream CoC can be in a revision-controlled doc, so that future CoC maintainers understand the reasoning behind each diff, as communities and contributors evolve.
Your discussion above clearly covers differences between Contributor Covenant and Xen's CoC, and could be translated to text suitable for commit messages, with one commit per diff from an upstream CoC.
Rich
This is not really productive. I was looking for concrete feedback, but we ended up with a long discussion with no actionable items that can help resolve the discussion.
How about the following:
- Make a proposal based on the Contributor Covenant
- Try and address some of the key customizations which I have been trying to make (which George outlined nicely)
This shouldn’t take much longer than the time you, George and I spent on this email thread already. You can follow the methodology you propose
We can then compare the output and decide which one to go for
Lars
