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

On Thu, 7 Jan 2016, Sara Golemon wrote: > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com> wrote: > > > Having a CoC which is wider in scope and ratified by a voted RFC > > rather than an email on some mailing list sends a strong message. > > Having it in our contributor guidelines would also go a long way. > > > > I guess here we fundamentally disagree - it seems that sending the > > message that 'we take this seriously' - by placing strong emphasis > > on reporting and penalties - is more important to some than agreeing > > about the values themselves. For me, the values themselves and > > communicating them properly and prominently are infinitely more > > important than the policing mechanism, as I believe that stating > > them clearly would go a very long way and is anything but useless. > > > And maybe this RFC is trying to do too much at once. Code diffs > should be scoped to "one change per diff", and RFCs should as well. > > Anthony, would you be amenable to reducing this first RFC to just a > code of conduct. This is; Define expectations from members of the > community. <snip> > Further evolution of that can come in later RFCs. I don't think it is a good idea to split things up. The value of a CoC is to show that you are trying to make a "community" a safe space. It's all fair and dandy to write down a set of rules/guidelines that a community should abide to, but IMO, the *real* values is in documenting the procedures to following - initial report, medition, etc - when something does go against the agreed upon "rules". cheers, Derick