Hi Sergii, Please be careful here and use your words wisely. It is always the easiest path to ‘stir up’ emotions and make it “us vs them”, this would end badly for everyone and eventually rip apart all the trust we have built together for so long. Coreboot project survives and thrives based on common respect and resolutions in good faith. I am sure this is not an easy decision for the leadership, there was some misunderstanding yes, and people have voiced out their concerns accordingly. I believe everyone including Nico (I have also talked to Nico and a few people involved) would want the best outcome for coreboot and resolve this in a goodwill. I would suggest to let it cool down and give some space to all parties so they could resolve this situation properly without many heated and unnecessary arguments arose.
Peace. Sheng On 4. Oct 2024, at 10:54, Sergii Dmytruk <sergii.dmyt...@3mdeb.com> wrote: Hi, On Fri, Oct 04, 2024 at 06:09:19AM +0000, David Hendricks via coreboot wrote: > * This particular issue was not brought to the attention of coreboot > leadership by anybody at Google or Intel. Someone in coreboot's > small business ecosystem asked us to look into CB:84356 > (https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/84356), which later > spawned other patches. The subtext is that upstream development is > very difficult and spending days squabbling over a tiny part of a > spec that we don't control (FSP in this case, but the same is true > of SBI, TFA, UEFI, etc) is counterproductive. Looks like you jumped at the opportunity to limit Nico's involvement in the project. > * We acknowledge that Nico has a certain communication style, and > like others in this thread we've each been on the receiving end of > it and have rationalized brushing it off for one reason or another. No, I did not say that for sure. Please don't misrepresent what people have wrote to make your point of view look supported. > However, this does not work in aggregate within a community or > organization where many people can take it many different ways, > especially given that we're a global organization with people of > varying levels of language proficiency. That is a terrible excuse for a bad decision. Those who have issues with understanding a language are the ones responsible for fixing them. You don't incorporate all possible typos into English to make it friendly for people who can't spell. > One can create a hostile environment even without overt actions such > as hitting someone, yelling profanity, inappropriate contact, etc. To > put this in another context, imagine the storm that would ensue if > your company's HR department responded to complaints of sexual > harassment by a guy named Bob in the sales department by saying "We've > known for years that Bob likes to flirt with his coworkers and we have > asked him to tone it down. Some have told us that they don't mind too > much, and those who complain probably just misunderstand his > communication style. Besides, a lot of people like Bob and he is a > really great salesman!" Eventually it comes crashing down with more > and more collateral damage the longer it's left unchecked. Why not compare Nico to Hitler right away? This is just ugly and I "expect better from everyone, especially senior members of the community." _______________________________________________ coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org _______________________________________________ coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org
