On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 02:30:45PM -0800, James Bottomley wrote: > On Fri, 2018-11-30 at 14:26 -0800, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 03:14:59PM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > [...] > > > Have you read Documentation/process/code-of-conduct- > > > interpretation.rst? > > > As has been pointed out, it contains a clear answer to how things > > > should be interpreted here. > > > > Ugh, was not aware that there two documents. > > > > Yeah, definitely sheds light. Why the documents could not be merged > > to single common sense code of conduct? > > The fact that we've arrived at essentially an original CoC > reinterpreted to the point where it's effectively a new CoC has been > the source of much debate and recrimination over the last few months > ... you can read it in the ksummit-discuss archives, but I really think > we don't want to reopen that can of worms. Got you... Well I now read the 2nd amendment now through, and yeah, kind of way I work/function anyway. Thank you for the patience... /Jarkko
