On 10/10/18 15:33, Eric S. Raymond wrote: > Josh Triplett <j...@joshtriplett.org>: >>> The words removed by this patch are a political statement. >> >> Choosing not to say those words is a political statement. > > The situation is not symmetrical. Choosing the protected classes > in the CoC is a *change* in its implied politics. > > It's a change that is, obviously from LKML traffic, very contentious. > If this were a tpurely technical matter, it would be described as > not backwards-compatible. > > It's a change that, I submit, should not have been made without a clear > consensus *in favor* of the change. > > Our culture has a process for this. It's called RFCs. If we want to > designate protected classes to be called out in conductt guidelines, > an RFC should be floated first and the change should be made only > if rough consensus has been achieved. >
Thank you for stating that clearly and concisely Eric. I will bow out of further discussion on this specific point as I have already seen this concept discussed on many threads already in recent weeks. -Frank
