On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 03:17:48AM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote: > I'd like this to be more global in coverage, and not just focus on the > mailing lists. In this draft of the Code of Conduct, 8 out of the 9 > rules are about email, so it feels more like a "mailing list CoC" > right now than a "CoC". ;-)
This is my main comment as well. What we currently have is precisely a *mailing list* CoC. And while that specific document might need improvements, which Wouter is addressing, I think we should enlarge the scope. I don't think we would gain much by addressing only interaction problems on mailing lists. We definitely need to do the same on the BTS, IRC, and other discussion fora. As a second comment, I'd love if we could separate more clearly technical aspects (e.g. the Reply/M-F-T discussion) from more general community interaction guidelines. In the general part we should distill what are our expectations of good interactions in Debian, e.g.: "show me the code", as well as politeness/professionalism requirements. In the media-specific parts we can then put stuff like Reply/M-F-T and whatnot. To help with the general effort of publishing a Debian CoC, a while ago I started collecting some related work at https://openhatch.org/wiki/Project_codes_of_conduct with the help of friends from other FOSS projects. I think we can benefit a lot from looking at what others have done in this area over the past decade. Many of us are aware of the Ubuntu CoC, but there is more out there, some derived from Ubuntu's, some written from scratch. I'm pretty sure we can find reusable pieces there, to be adapted to Debian's culture. (Oh, and do not hesitate to contribute to that page!) Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli . . . . . . . z...@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o Former Debian Project Leader . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o . « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
