This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Requesting a cool down period.
- From: Torvald Riegel <triegel at redhat dot com>
- To: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Carlos O'Donell <carlos at redhat dot com>, Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh at gotplt dot org>, Rich Felker <dalias at aerifal dot cx>, Richard Stallman <rms at gnu dot org>, Zack Weinberg <zackw at panix dot com>, Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval dot zanella at linaro dot org>, DJ Delorie <dj at redhat dot com>, Patsy Franklin <pfrankli at redhat dot com>, Rafal Luzynski <digitalfreak at lingonborough dot com>, Paul Eggert <eggert at cs dot ucla dot edu>, Andreas Schwab <schwab at suse dot de>, "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, "Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv at altlinux dot org>, Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>, Mark Wielaard <mjw at redhat dot com>, Javiera Serrano Polo <javier at jasp dot net>, "Federico Leva (Nemo)" <nemowiki at gmail dot com>, Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>, Mark Brown <ms_brown at sbcglobal dot net>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>, "Ryan S. Arnold" <ryan dot arnold at gmail dot com>, Maxim Kuvyrkov <maxim dot kuvyrkov at linaro dot org>, GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 20:17:11 +0200
- Subject: Re: Requesting a cool down period.
- References: <1aa2c730-681c-3c07-7e90-d0f36e294120@redhat.com> <1525954978.21101.216.camel@redhat.com> <edc2be76-e629-4a46-05b6-0ecd9340465b@redhat.com> <ord0y3o1vr.fsf@lxoliva.fsfla.org>
On Thu, 2018-05-10 at 14:29 -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On May 10, 2018, "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > On 05/10/2018 08:22 AM, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2018-05-10 at 02:13 -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> >>> Please lend me your support by abiding by a cooling down period,
> >>> and preparing for a proper discussion after the cool down.
> >>
> >> I think we should still point out behavior on the mailing list that we
> >> think is not representative of the glibc community, and not accepted by
> >> the community (eg, the anonymous comment I replied to). We might have
> >> many new people reading the list or just the particular thread in
> >> question, who haven't sampled all other posts on the list. I'd like to
> >> avoid that they get wrong impressions.
>
> > I agree. This would not be a discussion of the above topics, but hopefully
> > a brief message that the topic is in cool down, and that the poster's
> > behaviour is is not acceptable. Some people, like strangers, will not abide
> > by the cool down, and should be reminded gently.
>
> May I suggest (excuse the one-past-the-end post) that, at least during
> the cool-down period, we refrain from even pointing out what is or isn't
> acceptable tone?
I don't think this is needed. For all posters adhering to the
cool-down, there's no issues because there are no posts by them.
Then there are posts such as the two coming from the guerillamail.com
accounts, which need to be responded to, IMO.
> One reason is that this debate is so heated that it's far too easy to
> mistake dissent for inadequacy of tone. Indeed, AFAICT in 100% of the
> cases in which one party criticized the tone of the other party, the
> parties held opposite positions in the debate. What's more: the same
> words, when used against or for people holding a certain position, got
> praise or criticism, respectively, depending on whether the
> praiser/critic's opinion was aligned or misaligned with the target of
> the praise or criticism. We don't want to even look like we're
> suppressing dissent, especially for strangers.
I disagree with your description of the situation, but now we're getting
back into the topics we didn't want to discuss, so I won't comment in
more detail...