[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines?
From: |
Gábor Boskovits |
Subject: |
Re: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines? |
Date: |
Sun, 28 Oct 2018 13:33:12 +0100 |
I have a feeling that I might confuse some things, as this thread is
getting rather long, so let me summarize what I have on my mind so
far:
1. There is general consensus that having both CoC and GKCG is pointless.
2. CoC is not welcome by all, mainly because they feel that it
discourages contributions.
3. GKCG seems to be inadequate in the opinion of the maintainers, as:
a. it does not define acceptable behaviour, and
b. it does not define processes.
My conclusion is that neither document really cuts the bill.
I proposed to try to roll our own, essentially based on GKCG,
but have the acceptable behaviour and the processes defined.
Do you think this can/should be done?
Do you think that this could result in a better situation overall?
Best regards,
g_bor
- Re: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines?, (continued)
Re: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines?, HiPhish, 2018/10/28
- Re: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines?,
Gábor Boskovits <=
- Re: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines?, Alex Griffin, 2018/10/28
- Re: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines?, Thorsten Wilms, 2018/10/28
- Re: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines?, Alex Sassmannshausen, 2018/10/29
- Re: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines?, Thorsten Wilms, 2018/10/29
- Re: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines?, Ricardo Wurmus, 2018/10/29
- OF-TOPIC: Re: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines?, Tonton, 2018/10/29
Re: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines?, Alex Sassmannshausen, 2018/10/29
Re: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines?, Björn Höfling, 2018/10/29