On 4/20/17, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2...@gmx.net> wrote: > >> ¹ https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xdg/2017-April/013882.html > > That linked email is also pretty interesting. It even might violate one > of the principles of the CoC:
I found the linked post (short, dozen sentences) even more enlightening: https://www.fooishbar.org/blog/fdo-contributor-covenant/ Quote: > The culture of our member projects reflect on us as a wider organisation [...] What I'm reading here is that FDO tries to transition from the "help with OSS project organization" to the "organization responsible for (subset of) OSS community". "Working with a framework" and "working within a framework" are two very different concepts. If FDO truly going to set steps on this path, then one has to be ready for more changes in the future. P.S. Compare FDO's CoC with this: https://www.kde.org/code-of-conduct/ or https://wiki.gnome.org/Foundation/CodeOfConduct . Much simpler smoother language. For all the weirdness of Debian as an organization, its CoC and Social Contract are simple and humane documents. _______________________________________________ poppler mailing list poppler@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/poppler