Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The SQLite Code of Ethics

sqlite.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 408 posts

Re: The SQLite Code of Ethics

#161

Post by MatthiasPortzel »

jacooper wrote: post #142
ripley12 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SQLite generally doesn't accept contributions. "Open-Source, not Open-Contribution" https://www.sqlite.org/copyright.html

I don't understand why he didn't just use MIT or CC0 as license. It gives the same rights and the same limitless nature, so why use an arbitrary license which might cause problems in some countries ? And also makes the contribution workflow more complex?

MIT requires that a copy of the license is distributed with the software—which means it is not strictly public-domain equivalent.

CC0 was not intended to be used as a software license, and IRCC includes a clause that the author withholds any patent rights, which which has its own set of concerns.

In practice, either of them would have worked fine, but part of the beauty of public domain code is that you can avoid having to specify a license.

Re: The SQLite Code of Ethics

#162

Post by BeFlatXIII »

ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #102
wyager wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If software engineering was available as a monastic vocation, we'd probably have a lot of significantly higher-quality software available. I would much rather use something written by a stylite with an esolang compiler than shat out by 100 poorly-coordinated javascript devs at MEGACORP.

I dunno about monastic programming getting a lot of takers. Don't forget that there's usually a vow of poverty involved; fully loaded Macbook Pros or decked out 16 core Threadripper workstations are not part of the picture.

However, a communal Mac Pro may be part of the infrastructure. It's a vow of individual poverty, but that doesn't mean the monastery itself does not contain riches that its monks have access to but do not privately own.

Re: The SQLite Code of Ethics

#163

Post by [deleted] »

nemo1618 wrote: post #92
defenestration wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a truth hidden in here. I would love to spend time at a monastry and code.

You can! I spent a week co-working at MAPLE ( https://www.monasticacademy.com ) earlier this month, living among monastics and participating in their practice. Honestly, I didn't get a lot of programming done, but that's probably because my goal shifted rather quickly from "get a lot of work done" to "take advantage of this rare opportunity to develop my meditation practice." Still, I think it'd be a great environmen…

[deleted]

Re: The SQLite Code of Ethics

#164

Post by BeFlatXIII »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #143
teakettle42 wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best response? “No”. The code of conduct push was a transparent game of social aggression — an attempt to shift open source power dynamics in favor of: (1) Allowing social activists, who could not acquire institutional power on the basis of their own technical merit, to co-opt open source institutions for their own aims and to extract resources. See also the contributor covenant, DEI consultants, et al. (2) Secur…

So a few bad apples has ruined the whole idea in your mind? Are you also satisfied with the diversity within the project communities that you contribute to?

Being part of the most diverse possible team simply isn't a priority and mostly seems to function as a distracting sideshow for the benefit of the fundraising wings of the organization/project.

Re: The SQLite Code of Ethics

#165

Post by Spivak »

FeepingCreature wrote: post #149
bitwize wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Contributor Covenant is the gold standard for a reason: it is a response to the bigotry and harassment problems that were endemic to the open source communities. Alone it doesn't achieve much, but combined with a good faith enforcement board it helps keep a community a pleasant, joyful place to contribute to, for everyone. And that will increase software quality and attract quality people, aside from being, you k…

With good modding, no code is needed. And with bad modding, the best code imaginable can achieve nothing. It is all down to the quality of the modding.

The whole point of having a code is to be a thing those mods can point to to justify the banhammer when people complain.

Everyone has a CoC, some people write them down.

Re: The SQLite Code of Ethics

#166

Post by gunfighthacksaw »

LAC-Tech wrote: post #160
logifail wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you have a truly diverse group of people, they will not suffer fascists in their group Not sure why one has to jump straight to fascists. Shouldn't a truly diverse group of people always include people with views that you disagree with? Otherwise we're defining a diverse group as 'looking diverse ' yet all thinking the same.

I think it's helpful when seeing the word "fascist" in 2022 to not take it literally. It now simply means "people to the right of me".

It would be extremely naive to think that fascism only happened in the 1920s-1940s.

Obviously, todays fascism looks nothing like that of the modern era, just as todays leftists are different.

But it’s back, poisoning our democracies and pushing the world into a new hell. Putin is a neofascist. I could tell you which Americans are fascists, but you all get touchy when anyone brings it up.

Re: The SQLite Code of Ethics

#167

Post by Veelox »

gunfighthacksaw wrote: post #133
logifail wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a set of beliefs The elephant in the room in many current attempts to encourage "diversity" is that a genuinely diverse range of opinions and/or beliefs ends up being not welcome at all.

[flagged]

It's amusing to me that you comment complaining that fascists will seize power given the chance. I have seen the same thought process but pointing at wokism instead of fascism. The parallel is so strong I had to reread your post to double check which side you were arguing to support.

Re: The SQLite Code of Ethics

#168

Post by nindalf »

There’s that libertarian streak of “his project, his rules” in this thread. He can include or exclude anyone he wants because it’s his project.

Well, I read the very first line and see that he doesn’t want me, or people like me to be a contributor to this project. And that’s fine. His project, so I hear. But personally, I’ve felt welcome to contribute to every other open source project out there. I’ve felt welcome to apply to any job out there. It feels jarring to be excluded like this. I feel hurt. I shouldn’t be made to feel like this, just because of my religious views.

And no, please don’t split any hairs like “no, he’s not excluding, he’s actually describing…”. You wouldn’t be supporting him if the first line changed to be based on race instead of religion. Then why are you supporting him now?

Re: The SQLite Code of Ethics

#169

Post by [deleted] »

ciupicri wrote: post #53
kennywinker wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what you think communism is, but: 2. Then, love your neighbor as yourself. 5. Do not steal. 6. Do not covet. 14. Relieve the poor. 15. Clothe the naked. 18. Be a help in times of trouble. 38. Be not lazy. Those are all pretty deeply in line with marxism. Jesus was a communist, after all.

I was talking about the implementation, not what was it supposed to be like. I haven't seen something like "love your neighbor as yourself". On the other hand inclusion and diversity were important topics. Former communist countries have more women in STEM.

[deleted]

Re: The SQLite Code of Ethics

#170

Post by gunfighthacksaw »

baobabKoodaa wrote: post #150
gunfighthacksaw wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Well, you wasted no time whatsoever in playing the Nazi card. If you're willing to hear a counterpoint: I disagree wholeheartedly with your worldview, and yet I support your right to express your views. See, I'm not looking to "silence", "suppress", or "destroy" you, even though I disagree with you. Please make a mental note that people like me exist and not everybody who disagrees with you is a fascist.

I’m not talking about silencing people I disagree with in terms of opinion. I’m talking about fascists disagreeing that certain ethnic/sexual/gender groups should be alive or allowed to thrive, or have certain rights.

If you think holding views like that is OK, you walk, talk and quack like a fascist.

Post reply on HN