SQLite Code of Conduct: First of all, love the Lord God with your whole heart
sqlite.org
sqlite.org
A CoC should reflect the values of those who work on a project and/or the project itself, if this does all the power to them. There’s nothing saying a CoC has to be the standard progressive gibberish.
There's nothing saying a CoC has to be standard supernatural gibberish either.
My only complaint is with generically categorizing alternatives as "gibberish".
This tends to convey a sense of arrogance and lack of tolerance that I have observed to be quite common among supernaturalists.
As evidence of this, I submit the fact that my post was immediately down voted --- despite being virtually identical to the original which wasn't. Thus demonstrating a clear basis for one "gibberish" over another.
>As evidence of this, I submit the fact that my post was immediately down voted
A lot of stuff people don't like gets down-voted.
I never said you did.
But which statement/"gibberish" people prefer or disagree with can tend to reveal their own cognitive bias.
The upvote/downvote system is increasingly used like on Reddit which is unfortunate.
You are stereotyping religious people (84% of the global population) while preaching about arrogance and lack of tolerance.
The real question is --- why is one acceptable but the other is not?
These "tricks" tend to reveal the reflexive bias that people hold. For evidence, see the posts above.
Is it arrogance to observe that, or to claim they are equivalently gibberish?
Religion, all religion, has been a drag on progress, holding us back from where we should truly be.
I’m referring to western civilization, which has been broadly Christian since Emperor Constantine (the 300s).
> Religion, all religion, had been a drag on progress
That’s a bold claim - are you sure that your fast-moving atheistic society would sustain itself? Prominent recent examples such as the USSR have failed spectacularly. Cosmopolitan societies like ancient Persia were overrun by the religious - ie they were outcompeted. Europe too, would have been overrun by Islam, had the Christian kingdoms not banded together in the middle ages.
Certainly it’s possible, but the absence of evidence confirming it is stark to my eye.
Your observation is false and easily proven so.
Most of the world is not Christian.
Civilization was maintained for thousands of years before the small Jewish and Christian minority even learned to write.
But thanks for further proving my point.
Certainly, other civilizations exist, before and elsewhere, but what proof do we have to demonstrate that other systems would have produced a comparable outcomes: in terms of progress, human development, etc.?
And could they sustain themselves? Many cultures and religions have failed, been out competed, overrun, or collapsed.
You’re free to assume you can create a better society on other principles. I will urge modesty, and refer you to Chesterton’s fence.
Even during these past 2,000 years (really less than that, given Christianity wasn't culturally dominant until several hundred years into that period), there were times where western civilization was carried by non-christian nations.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18273390 (63 comments)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18273530 (288 comments)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18297514 (19 comments)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18313131 (89 comments)
SQLite Code of Ethics (2020) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32918332 - Sept 2022 (14 comments)
The SQLite Code of Ethics - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31886687 - June 2022 (379 comments)
SQLite – Code of Ethics - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31057104 - April 2022 (2 comments)
SQLite: Code of Ethics - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26547201 - March 2021 (23 comments)
SQLite updated Code of Conduct - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18313131 - Oct 2018 (88 comments)
SQLite Code of Ethics - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18297514 - Oct 2018 (19 comments)
Sqlite: Code Of Conduct - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18273530 - Oct 2018 (281 comments)
SQLite Code of Conduct - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18273390 - Oct 2018 (60 comments)
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
People are not perfect and every single person alive has areas where they would choose to have pain inflicted on themselves because of lies they believe about themselves. They would visit those lies on other people as well under your single code.
We therefore need the appeal to a higher ideal to break free of those false beliefs. We are learning creatures and life is a journey of knowledge. We should always be learning better ways to treat each other as the first rule. Then as a second rule is the Golden Rule to never treat anyone less than than the very best way that you have learned until now.
And this matches nicely with Jesus's teachings in Mark 12:28-31
Working for the collective good of yourself *and* others is all about striving beyond just youself.
I'm sorry you missed that.
Lack of enlightenment exists in any system or moral code ever put forth.
my self interest will help me reach the top
Self interest may also prevent you from "reaching the top" ... or it may remove you from any "top" you do attain. "Enlightenment" is about viewing things from more than one solitary perspective.
All of human history pretty clearly demonstrates the superior power and strength of collective effort and achievement. Narcissism doesn't naturally lend itself to this and is generally viewed as an aberrant, short sighted approach that is rarely tolerated or rewarded by the test of time.
Prisons are full of extremely self focused individuals who tried to get ahead at other's expense and failed.
Which is why you see things like Chastity thrown in. So I guess we’re not going to see little SQLite coders..
chaste, adjective, 1: innocent of unlawful sexual intercourse 2: celibate, 3: pure in thought and act, modest.
> The founder of SQLite and all current developers have pledged to follow the spirit of The Rule to the best of their ability. They view The Rule as their promise to all SQLite users of how the developers are expected to behave. This is a one-way promise, or covenant. In other words, the developers are saying: "We will treat you this way regardless of how you treat us."
Where did this come from? Without having any idea of the background this reads like some conservative Christian who adopted a weird CoC as a reaction to what they felt was “too progressive” CoCs for other projects? I may be way off the mark there though.
He’s free to do whatever he wants of course but isn’t this a fork risk?
> No one is required to follow The Rule, to know The Rule, or even to think that The Rule is a good idea. The Founder of SQLite believes that anyone who follows The Rule will live a happier and more productive life, but individuals are free to dispute or ignore that advice if they wish.
The average CoC we’re all more familiar with does the exact same thing, so I don’t think this is a valid criticism.
I find it odd that would be a requirement, but that’s the world we live in I guess.
In fairness though - I agree with it.
SQLite is closed to outside contributions.
> but isn’t this a fork risk
Sure. But don't expect a fork to succeed beyond the original. It's not like egcs/gcc where existing developers were unhappy and wanted to break free from perceived dysfunction.
Incorrect.
Anyone is allowed to contributed to the SQLite code base. There is no religious test, nor even any code-of-conducts requirements for being able to contribute to SQLite. This has always been the case. But the barrier to making contributions is high - higher than many other projects. There are two main reasons for this:
(1) Any contributions need to be able to demonstrate, with legal rigor, that they are in the public domain. Otherwise, if copyrighted code were introduced, SQLite itself would cease to be in the public domain. The SQLite project places a lot of emphasis on provenance of the code.
(2) Contributions need to demonstrate that they will be useful to a very wide audience, and that they will not diminish our ability to maintain the code for decades into the future. Most of the effort in a project like SQLite is long-term maintenance. People might be really proud of the work they have done on some patch over a day, or week, or month. But the amount of work needed to generate the patch is nothing compared to the amount of work they are asking the developers to put into testing, documenting, and maintaining that patch for the life of the project (currently projected to be 27 more years).
Many people, and even a few companies, have contributed code to SQLite over the years. I have legal documentation for all such contributions in the firesafe in my office. We are able to track every byte of the SQLite source code back to its original creator. The project has been and continues to be open to outside contributions, as long as those contributions meet high standards of provenance and maintainability.
There is some group that may change that is “the contributors” which are presumably bound by the CoC. I also assume this group changes from time to time.
Are you sure SQLite doesn’t accept outside contributions? Usually for CoCs you mean the whole project including for any contribution such as bug reports, which are some times more “open” than code contributions.
Apparently the rule isn’t required (which is even stranger, so the whole thing is just pointless anyway).
Perhaps the author does not enforce much of their CoE? How would they even verify many of the rules?