I 100% stand behind Mitch’s summary below. This is a real problem in this project that not only makes it a less than great place to work, but is also indirectly affecting the quality of the code, for those that care only about that part.
Tor Arne > On 25 Oct 2018, at 13:22, Mitch Curtis <mitch.cur...@qt.io> wrote: > > It's a bit of a loaded question. First you call asocial behaviour a "quirk", > as if someone who treats other people like crap is "quirky" - I prefer your > phrase "rude arse". Should a code of conduct aim to stop "quirky" behaviour > amongst contributors? No, of course not. That's what makes people > interesting. A code of conduct should draw the line between quirky behaviour > and "rude arse" behaviour. > > To answer your question: in my experience, nothing happens. They continue > being a rude arse because: > > 1) That is who they are and they aren't interested in changing. > 2) People have already decided that this person's technical contributions are > worth enough that they can step on anyone, regardless of the fact that it's > supposed to be a professional setting. > 3) They're "actually a nice person in real life"... as if this excuses it. So > if I write "You're a dumbarse" on a piece of paper and send it through the > post, but a week later invite you over to my house for a home-cooked meal, > it's OK? Are we really encouraging keyboard warriors? > > Rafael said: > > "During all these years contributing to Qt I have encountered many times > strong criticism in gerrit - some people were very harsh or *seemingly* rude > - or that was what I thought, until I realized that: 1) it was just their > modus operandi; 2) at the end of the day, their comments made sense and > improved my code; 3) they were not butt hurt when roles were reversed." > > To me it seems like you guys are saying: > > "I don't care if this person treats me like crap because they sure can code." > > I'm happy for you if you've gotten this far in life and decided that you like > being insulted in exchange for someone reviewing your code (or even just > asking a question on IRC), but personally I do not like it. I'm more than > capable of standing up for myself, but other people who feel the same way may > not feel comfortable speaking out. > > What you're also saying is: > > "You (the Qt Project) aren't going to do anything about their behaviour > because they contribute good code." > > Which sadly is true. Really, your question seems almost rhetorical given > this. It's even explicitly acknowledged on the home page of the thing that > we're basing our code of conduct on: > > "People with “merit” are often excused for their bad behavior in public > spaces based on the value of their technical contributions." > > - https://www.contributor-covenant.org/ > > Disregarding all of the other factors (racism, sexual identity, age, etc.) > and just keeping it purely about treating other people with respect: the > statement above is absolutely true. > > Honestly I have my doubts whether this code of conduct will actually achieve > its most basic goal, given that many people have apparently tried to > intervene with the people who treat others poorly and nothing has come of it > (although people will tell you it's gotten better). I hope it does, but I've > been in the community and around these people long enough to know that it > probably won't. Reading through these replies, it's also clear that a large > amount of the people responding are quite happy with the status quo, which, > although not surprising to me, is always disheartening. > > I haven't seen any racism, discrimination, etc., but there are definitely > people within the community whose behaviour is such that other developers > will avoid interacting with them, even if it would have likely improved the > quality of their work or got that work done faster. I doubt you'll hear from > those people though, because they just want to get their job done -- which is > perfectly understandable, but does not excuse the behaviour of the people > they try to avoid. > >> On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 1:06 PM Konstantin Tokarev <annu...@yandex.ru >> <mailto:annu...@yandex.ru> > wrote: >> >> >> >> >> 25.10.2018, 13:01, "NIkolai Marchenko" <enmarantis...@gmail.com >> <mailto:enmarantis...@gmail.com> >: >> >> And btw, we have had a clear majority in favour of adding a CoC at >> the Contributor Summit >> > >> > It seems very wrong to make such decisions at conventions where >> only a small part of the contributors can participate. >> > Especially for something as big and divisive >> >> +1 >> >> -- >> Regards, >> Konstantin >> > > _______________________________________________ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
