RFC: YAPC Code of conduct up on github?
rob.kinyon at gmail.com
Mon Mar 25 08:20:56 PDT 2013
Great points for discussion. Before going into some of the points, I'd
like to pose a meta-question to the group - does it make sense to have the
discussion on the yapc at pm.org mailing list or in the YAPC-NA/code-conduct
I'm not going to speak on the purpose or criteria for success - I'm not
sure I have much to say on those right now. But, the process for amendment
is the github repository. We all know how to amend CPAN modules. Let's use
the same process (with a couple modifications at the end) for this. We know
it works for code - this is just another type of code.
The modifications at the end are that TPF determines when the
proposed_XXXX branch is closed for modification and that the lawyers have
the final code review. Other than that, submit pull requests just like
On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Ya´akov Sloman
<yaakov at perlfoundation.org>wrote:
> Hello, everyone.
> As Community Advocate for TPF, my portfolio includes "community health and
> growth", so the sorts of issues around a CoC are very much incorporated
> into my rôle. Of course, I am very happy to see so much interest in
> community issues, it's a sign of at least one aspect of health, but, from
> my perspective, this particular activity is question begging. I believe we
> need to come to a community consensus on three more fundamental things
> before the work of writing the CoC can be a service to the Perl community,
> which is surely the intention here.
> To advocate for the Perl community as a whole, that is, for those not only
> participating here, but those not present (which includes many current,
> long-term members of our community and all future ones), I am compelled to
> ask for that three question be answered, in terms of the consensus within
> the community before the process of writing a CoC (or editing the existing
> one) can move forward. Asking these questions presupposes no particular
> answer, it is a way to find the genuine consensus and create something
> truly descriptive of the ethos.
> 1. What is the purpose of the CoC?
> Writing a CoC is a *practical* step. To do it in a way that is
> *practically* effective, we need to know why we are doing it at all. This
> is not an uncontroversial question. Some in the community feel the need is
> self-evident, others deny the need altogether. Most people haven't even
> considered it, and may not care one way or another. For this reason, we
> need a charter, a goal, something practical that is expected to be the
> outcome of a *good* CoC.
> 2. What are the criteria for success?
> Once we have a goal, we can identify empirical tests, which may be
> objective or somewhat subjective (the subject being the Perl community)
> that will allow us to determine if the CoC, as written, does achieve the
> goal that was set for it. This is very important, since the CoC will
> almost certainly contain some specific things, rather then general
> principles, which might need emendation or ever deletion, and we'll need to
> be able to tell if that's the case. If we can't come up with a way to test
> the efficacy of a CoC, I don't think we have any business writing one.
> 3. What is the process for amendment in light of failed testing?
> We must, from the outset, have a process for dealing with the results of
> testing. If we don't, the CoC will become a burden, and surely will be a
> source of unending friction among community members. The process should
> ensure that the CoC evolves with the community, and continues to reflect a
> consensus about the ethos.
> In the end, a Perl Community CoC must reflect the community itself. While
> it will undoubtedly change the community by dint of its existence, it must
> also reflect the changes the community is willing to make. Ideas and even
> phraseology from other communities' CoCs will no doubt be very helpful, but
> only after we understand what our community believes is right. The CoC
> must be *descriptive* of the broad center of Perl people, and
> *prescriptive* only for those people who stray outside this. I don't
> believe we are in a position to claim we can write something descriptive at
> this time. We first need the answers to the questions posed above.
> yapc mailing list
> yapc at pm.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the yapc