> On 25 Oct 2018, at 14:21, NIkolai Marchenko <enmarantis...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Multiple people have alrady asked for examples of what the code is trying to > solve. > If you have those, we'd like to hear about these exact cases.
Mitch’s email describes this in a good way. I’m obviously not going to go into details about concrete cases. If the project/community can’t trust that these are real concerns coming from long standing contributors, without airing dirty laundry in the process, then we’re worse off than I thought. Tor Arne > > > > > On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 2:32 PM Tor Arne Vestbø <tor.arne.ves...@qt.io> wrote: > 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
