> The controversial discrimination protection sentences at least should be > carefully discussed. It's not some thing that we could accept as easy as > rewrite.
Hi Alexey, I've just read the QUIP proposal and couldn't find any controversial sentences. Could you elaborate? Which points shall be discussed? On Sat, 27 Oct 2018 at 22:41, Konstantin Shegunov <kshegu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 27, 2018 at 11:20 PM Thiago Macieira <thiago.macie...@intel.com> > wrote: >> >> The answer to all of those questions needs to be "yes". Anything short of >> that >> means the CoC is powerless and just for show. > > > Which was my point exactly. > >> >> Whether there's a termination of employment or not is out of scope, since the >> CoC does not rule TQtC employment and what other work there is inside that >> company. >> >> >> Note also it applies to any company. If you're not welcome anymore in the >> community where your employer is asking you to do work, that is going to >> affect your employment. > > > I agree. However my argument was that the QtC being a major contributor to > the codebase is going to have to abide by the ruling of the proposed > committee, which is a significant commitment (and a major nitpick I admit). > _______________________________________________ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
