From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (mailfrom) smtp.mailfrom=google.com (client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::82c; helo=mail-qt1-x82c.google.com; envelope-from=emilyshaffer@google.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="dptytDQI"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mail-qt1-x82c.google.com (mail-qt1-x82c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::82c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 42VbRY4xQczF14b for ; Thu, 11 Oct 2018 01:03:37 +1100 (AEDT) Received: by mail-qt1-x82c.google.com with SMTP id d14-v6so5728855qto.4 for ; Wed, 10 Oct 2018 07:03:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=tmQLD92esnN3OKWVVgCicnL9NwpUu+xTQIue3GbZ/1s=; b=dptytDQIK5fZKABTCY+FKgGJwa00H+zqeromn1UNOP7fC+TUXBpvCt6JfnchCdgwxL GSAk+Bl9/lmLRtnS77v8Xnw17r+yCMJXM1F8r1/BCxqlb4OJ7TGFCIerrW9z1DAIArS+ t8+kqpn5chp8vMRzuzsFsLWqYP4uwpoe2RQ+oU+XZIE6PHqST8S3oDYQhixaUeCn6y0M +BRWcsZnFrIYJnzdnhbxreILdcmYPQr5CVR60jSxRTGzg49g+VsMb+G12txjhfh7/AuY y66A7lt1DA34p8vUGKCNhiix6QBAoH78pPwLqa5BtX2QBM5JF9cs0iAGbON/p3pP3pnA v1zw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=tmQLD92esnN3OKWVVgCicnL9NwpUu+xTQIue3GbZ/1s=; b=Iqk9tKzmzk7QgbbvdMFpfVMYcxkQ5tXUCNABESVGNKELhI5n17t/vYxoqruBtjlNuv o3STNsx0nYw8q+kxtCtE4B216jWfcyiDVv+IKYAM38cEXQACESPaR5dssYUdDJzQK5tl 9QA626uBUSpl6fSfCR31JK1O9Lri/quet8kvKSHzVqOS+pWiw1b+1N3j6qI2ki68Z9R+ 26ms1uHVYP2O58eqcTop7zXEEPdnUDjZnA7RGxNWkq7U6/diMJxSUGnAH0Vi29puVNSS SDAxysA1yC9c3gX/0pPtE8KTxAexeaJ5+3osggs5Ykvl2MtlyTL3bi5H9XhEXtJ59z4d IqxA== X-Gm-Message-State: ABuFfohyLYLqrlHP9hhJTTEVocL1DIGB74sCK9SMYJwYIqSlM6jVihVU ufdDbJQ2R1eHfHNMrfe9olbg/yLwofb8+EytJQZcGQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACcGV6378PzcmnumjYYfvpLAFdiIY38vTs0WfenTNivgpqSI2i+P+YxUv0qsDbrAEkEzlw/RLyeUDINmmQS7csLClRc= X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5508:: with SMTP id j8-v6mr27270041qtq.139.1539180213360; Wed, 10 Oct 2018 07:03:33 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Emily Shaffer Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 07:03:20 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Community Code of Conduct To: Jeff Osier-Mixon Cc: OpenBMC Maillist Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000dd62f00577e05117" X-BeenThere: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Development list for OpenBMC List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 14:03:38 -0000 --000000000000dd62f00577e05117 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 11:53 PM Jeff Osier-Mixon wrote: > You are absolutely right to ask these questions, and I'm sure each > community will want to fine-tune it, although as a community manager I > actually prefer some of the vagueness in it. It is normal to add to a CoC > to try to cover all the bases, but people will always think up ways to > violate the spirit of the rule while staying within the letter. For a > positive community (like openbmc) the CoC is a guideline for new users, > rather than legislation for behavior, as it should be. > As long as we're aware that there's a line to tread with the vagueness, I don't mind. IMO one of the points is to highlight to community members what is and isn't abusive language, so having a code that's too vague opens the door for a victim to be gaslit out of realizing there is a problem going on. I don't feel that's an issue with this Contributor Covenant. > > The best offense is a good community manager who can set the tone, with an > escalation path to a TSC or governing board, whichever is appropriate for a > given community. Ideally it would never be used - it never has been needed > in almost 8 yrs of the Yocto Project, as the leaders simply set a tone of > respect. > +1000. Like I said at the outset, I don't think this is to address a problem happening now, so much as it is to codify our current positive culture and cover ourselves for later. > > That's a really good question of harassment outside. Technically it is > private conversation, or outside the project's boundaries. If I were > community mgr in that case, I would have a frank conversation with the > harasser and let them know that simply isn't the way escalation is done in > this project, then provide the proper way and make sure their concern is > answered while respecting both sides. That being said, being hands-on > doesn't scale up to thousands of participants. > > One more tidbit - this is the same CoC adopted by the kernel community and > several other high profile communities, so there is precedent within the > wider open source community for it. One thing I like quite a lot about it > is that it is itself open source - if I find a bug with it, I can submit a > pull request to the CoC itself. > > I hope this is helpful to the process and not disruptive :) > > I've got a copy of the Contributor Covenant up for review in docs/ now: https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/#/c/openbmc/docs/+/13920/ Happy to continue discussion in both places. > --000000000000dd62f00577e05117 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Tue, Oct 9,= 2018 at 11:53 PM Jeff Osier-Mixon <jefro.net@gmail.com> wrote:
You are absolutely right to ask these questions, and I&= #39;m sure each community will want to fine-tune it, although as a communit= y manager I actually prefer some of the vagueness in it. It is normal to ad= d to a CoC to try to cover all the bases, but people will always think up w= ays to violate the spirit of the rule while staying within the letter. For = a positive community (like openbmc) the CoC is a guideline for new users, r= ather than legislation for behavior, as it should be.

As long as we're aware that there's a line to trea= d with the vagueness, I don't mind. IMO one of the points is to highlig= ht to community members what is and isn't abusive language, so having a= code that's too vague opens the door for a victim to be gaslit out of = realizing there is a problem going on.=C2=A0 I don't feel that's an= issue with this Contributor Covenant.
=C2=A0

The best offense is a= good community manager who can set the tone, with an escalation path to a = TSC or governing board, whichever is appropriate for a given community. Ide= ally it would never be used - it never has been needed in almost 8 yrs of t= he Yocto Project, as the leaders simply set a tone of respect.=C2=A0
<= /div>

+1000. Like I said at the outset, I d= on't think this is to address a problem happening now, so much as it is= to codify our current positive culture and cover ourselves for later.
<= /div>
=C2=A0
=
That's a really good question of harassment outside. Tec= hnically it is private conversation, or outside the project's boundarie= s. If I were community mgr in that case, I would have a frank conversation = with the harasser and let them know that simply isn't the way escalatio= n is done in this project, then provide the proper way and make sure their = concern is answered while respecting both sides. That being said, being han= ds-on doesn't scale up to thousands of participants.

One more tidbit - this is the same CoC adopted by the kernel communi= ty and several other high profile communities, so there is precedent within= the wider open source community for it. One thing I like quite a lot about= it is that it is itself open source - if I find a bug with it, I can submi= t a pull request to the CoC itself.

I hope thi= s is helpful to the process and not disruptive=C2=A0 :)


I've got a copy of the Contributor Covenan= t up for review in docs/ now:


Happy to cont= inue discussion in both places.
<= div class=3D"gmail_quote">
--000000000000dd62f00577e05117--