From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from omta36.uswest2.a.cloudfilter.net (omta36.uswest2.a.cloudfilter.net [35.89.44.35]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6CD5B3858D38 for ; Tue, 3 Oct 2023 17:52:48 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 6CD5B3858D38 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=tromey.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=tromey.com Received: from eig-obgw-5007a.ext.cloudfilter.net ([10.0.29.141]) by cmsmtp with ESMTP id nRfvqPVe6MZBknjZfqRFJq; Tue, 03 Oct 2023 17:52:47 +0000 Received: from box5379.bluehost.com ([162.241.216.53]) by cmsmtp with ESMTPS id njZeqsbmAsdspnjZeqoGim; Tue, 03 Oct 2023 17:52:46 +0000 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=FJ4Iesks c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=651c54ee a=ApxJNpeYhEAb1aAlGBBbmA==:117 a=ApxJNpeYhEAb1aAlGBBbmA==:17 a=OWjo9vPv0XrRhIrVQ50Ab3nP57M=:19 a=dLZJa+xiwSxG16/P+YVxDGlgEgI=:19 a=bhdUkHdE2iEA:10 a=Qbun_eYptAEA:10 a=CCpqsmhAAAAA:8 a=MOdEd0Ved-ALrTKpx1YA:9 a=ul9cdbp4aOFLsgKbc677:22 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tromey.com; s=default; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date:References :Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=QKpwZQoydNi4Lhkcu5JmT+Zn54y2d3ZUcOri31Pb6jg=; b=Tl7+cQAxaMwjcYrWabrpU+5u97 fpi7tLGXYXps7NAoZoMBizZJ4yUxApmCVjnt3ACzfRKO7iKZU7JYUil1QyDcrspAw4mVlvcBR10Dn vd9oFf5xSe9M60t5A4WaXcl0g; Received: from 71-211-130-31.hlrn.qwest.net ([71.211.130.31]:49202 helo=murgatroyd) by box5379.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1qnjZd-001jG1-27; Tue, 03 Oct 2023 11:52:45 -0600 From: Tom Tromey To: "Richard Earnshaw (lists) via Binutils" Cc: Carlos O'Donell , Nick Clifton , "Richard Earnshaw (lists)" , ganandan@redhat.com, markobri@redhat.com Subject: Re: Binutils Code of Conduct References: <877cockjm6.fsf@redhat.com> <0bafa825-2033-2b17-de12-4e99bd334e61@redhat.com> <4f7fd5dc-ea33-95f0-a2e1-44cef841a418@arm.com> X-Attribution: Tom Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2023 11:52:44 -0600 In-Reply-To: <4f7fd5dc-ea33-95f0-a2e1-44cef841a418@arm.com> (Richard Earnshaw via Binutils's message of "Tue, 3 Oct 2023 10:54:39 +0100") Message-ID: <87fs2rzj83.fsf@tromey.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - box5379.bluehost.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - sourceware.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - tromey.com X-BWhitelist: no X-Source-IP: 71.211.130.31 X-Source-L: No X-Exim-ID: 1qnjZd-001jG1-27 X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Source-Sender: 71-211-130-31.hlrn.qwest.net (murgatroyd) [71.211.130.31]:49202 X-Source-Auth: tom+tromey.com X-Email-Count: 1 X-Org: HG=bhshared;ORG=bluehost; X-Source-Cap: ZWx5bnJvYmk7ZWx5bnJvYmk7Ym94NTM3OS5ibHVlaG9zdC5jb20= X-Local-Domain: yes X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4xfL9moedfr4czICkXR+wBH2SllNMsh0EYyFp3bOGYz+JKTTRUH3r6pMgDlp+ioYGhdb6yQpZsgYZd9uySjRSS+NRWxQclrYlE0nK7su8ITiUtvduTzWf1 PE5EFIdQLJFeUlAHozna3qOmh7I+uiXj+t3JIHh3oFnfCyzsErdRKlIYs/vmvpU2joZD68DqXjz+FtXLd58jlXae603win6SKjo= X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3019.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: >>>>> "Richard" == Richard Earnshaw (lists) via Binutils writes: Richard> I realize that we have separate projects, each with slightly different Richard> governance structures, but I'd really like to see *one* CoC that Richard> covers all of the GNU toolchain components - gcc, glibc, binutils and Richard> gdb - rather than one for each which is nearly, but not quite the Richard> same. Yes, each component can have a different committee, as needed Richard> (and that might lead to slightly different interpretations), but Richard> having identical policies would help foster better understanding and Richard> compliance IMO. I'd support this as well. thanks, Tom