Re: [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

All, On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 4:06 PM, Anthony Ferrara <ircmaxell@gmail.com> wrote: > Hey all, > > I have created a new RFC for the PHP Project to adopt the Contributor > Covenant as the official Code of Conduct for the project > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/adopt-code-of-conduct > > Let me know what you think or if there are any concerns > > Thanks > > Anthony I have made some more substantial changes to the CoC. Please review https://wiki.php.net/rfc/adopt-code-of-conduct It still uses the Contributor Covenant as evaluating alternatives hasn't occurred yet. It is still in my plans to do so and potentially replace it with another, I just haven't had the chance to review many of them yet. If you know of a better CoC, please let me know so I may add it to the list to evaluate prior to putting up for vote. The choice should be as transparent as possible and I welcome discussion around it. There has been some discussion asking for a split of the RFC into two. I do not believe that this is a good idea, because the CoC is useless without some sort of resolution strategy (without *anything*). And if we do need to do something (which I firmly believe), then why not do it right the first time. I am more than willing to evolve this proposal significantly (it's no where near a final form). This discussion should help it evolve. A quick summary of the changes: * Renamed "CoC Team" to "Conflict Resolution Team" * The process was altered to focus on defusing and mediating rather than punitive. Additionally, it is made clear that punitive action in any form shall be a last resort. * Temporary bans shall not include internals@ to allow for appeals and conversation around the incident to be fair to both parties. This is under the assumption that behavior on internals@ remains civil as judged by the overall community. * Added a quarterly Conflict Resolution Team report posted to internals to summarize all activity * I added a few of examples of when the CoC should apply outside of the project, and what constitutes "representing the project". These are not meant to be exhaustive, but intended to communicate the "spirit" of representing. Again, all of this is up for discussion. I am simply expanding here to better clarify and codify what my intent was here. The thing I want to communicate is the spirit rather than the specifics. Please let me know what you think. I welcome all constructive feedback. Thanks Anthony