[ruby-core:73489] Re: [Ruby trunk - Misc #12004] Code of Conduct

Chuck:

C4.1 contains a poorly-specified, but *real* code of conduct:

Administrators SHOULD block or ban "bad actors" who cause stress and pain
> to others in the project. This should be done after public discussion, wi=
th
> a chance for all parties to speak. A bad actor is someone who repeatedly
> ignores the rules and culture of the project, who is needlessly
> argumentative or hostile, or who is offensive, and who is unable to
> self-correct their behavior when asked to do so by others


The =E2=80=9Crules and culture=E2=80=9D of the project do not appear to be =
written, at
least there, but they are guidelines toward participation. (It would be
better if they were written.)

C4.1 is also a really good document overall. With changes to reflect Ruby=
=E2=80=99s
nature, licensing, etc. (plus a bit to specify some of Ruby=E2=80=99s =E2=
=80=9Crules and
culture=E2=80=9D), it would probably be a good option here.

However, the mass adoption of CoCs by projects has only started over the
last year or so; push for this data next year. I suspect that 0mq didn=E2=
=80=99t
see an immediate pick-up, but saw it as a result of (1) application of C4.1
and (2) outreach. I don=E2=80=99t know since I=E2=80=99m not part of that c=
ommunity.

As I have said earlier in this thread, I am not *that* interested in the
data myself. Sometimes there is a clear =E2=80=9Cright=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=
=9Cwrong=E2=80=9D, and I see
having *some* CoC that makes one=E2=80=99s stance on harassment clear as a =
clear
=E2=80=9Cright=E2=80=9D.

-a

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 11:58 AM, <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Issue #12004 has been updated by Chuck Remes.
>
>
> In #371, Kurtis Rainbolt-Greene listed several projects that have adopted
> the CoC and asked if any of the feared downsides of a CoC have arisen. I
> think we should ask an opposite question. Have any of those projects seen
> an *increase* in participation? Have any marginalized peoples suddenly
> joined the community and contributed (via code, bug reports, documentatio=
n,
> etc)? And if there is an increase, is it statistically measurable on an
> on-going basis or just a one-off?
>
> I'm too lazy to do the work to prove this out one way or the other, but
> then again the burden of proof to adopt a CoC is on its proponents. They
> should do the work to prove a CoC's value *particularly* since it will
> create more work for the core team.
>
> I'm going to go on a short tangent. I am a long time member of the Zeromq
> community. Several years ago there was a falling out between two core
> contributors and one of them ended up leaving the project (to start XS an=
d
> Nano projects). The arguments and split were handled very well without an=
y
> CoC in place at all.
>
> The core contributor learned quite a bit from that experience. He ended u=
p
> devising a new process for contributors and community participants. After
> some evolution, he made a nice post on it and calls it the C4.1 process.
> See here for details:  http://hintjens.com/blog:93
>
> Furthermore, his efforts to grow the community were wildly successful. Th=
e
> community absolutely exploded in the months following the personnel chang=
e.
> Code contributions and bug reports came from a whole group of new people
> who had never participated before because the guideline (NOT a CoC) lower=
ed
> the barriers for participation. The community was vibrant before the
> project fork but afterwards it was vibrant X 10.
>
> This community renewal all occurred without a CoC.
>
> It could be argued that the Ruby community is already stronger than the
> zeromq community but it could always be stronger. Perhaps it should look =
to
> the C4.1 process as a potential way for improving interest and
> participation?
>
> At minimum, the CoC proponents should *prove* via some metric (community
> participation, more/better PRs, bug reports, etc) that adopting a CoC wil=
l
> benefit this project. So far it just sounds like more work for Core.
>
> ----------------------------------------
> Misc #12004: Code of Conduct
> https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/12004#change-56710
>
> * Author: Coraline Ada Ehmke
> * Status: Assigned
> * Priority: Normal
> * Assignee: Yukihiro Matsumoto
> ----------------------------------------
> I am the creator of the Contributor Covenant, a code of conduct for Open
> Source projects. At last count there are over 13,000 projects on Github
> that have adopted it. This past year saw adoption of Contributor Covenant
> by a lot of very large, very visible projects, including Rails, Github's
> Atom text editor, Angular JS, bundler, curl, diaspora, discourse, Eclipse=
,
> rspec, shoes, and rvm. The bundler team made code of conduct integration =
an
> option in the gem creation workflow, putting it on par with license
> selection. Many open source language communities have already adopted the
> code of conduct, including Elixir, Mono, the .NET foundation, F#, and
> Apple's Swift. RubyTogether also adopted a policy to only fund Ruby
> projects that had a solid code of conduct in place.
>
> Right now in the PHP community there is a healthy debate about adopting
> the Contributor Covenant. Since it came from and has been so widely adopt=
ed
> by the Ruby community at large, I think it's time that we consider adopti=
ng
> it for the core Ruby language as well.
>
> Our community prides itself on niceness. What a code of conduct does is
> define what we mean by nice. It states clearly that we value openness,
> courtesy, and compassion. That we care about and want contributions from
> people who may be different from us. That we pledge to respect all
> contributors regardless of their race, gender, sexual orientation, or oth=
er
> factors. And it makes it clear that we are prepared to follow through on
> these values with action when and if an incident arises.
>
> I'm asking that we join with the larger Ruby community in supporting the
> adoption of the Contributor Covenant for the Ruby language. I think that
> this will be an important step forward and will ensure the continued
> welcoming and supportive environment around Ruby. You can read the full
> text of the Contributor Covenant at
> http://contributor-covenant.org/version/1/3/0/ and learn more at
> http://contributor-covenant.org/.
>
> Thanks for your consideration and I look forward to hearing your thoughts=
.
>
>
> ---Files--------------------------------
> Screen Shot 2016-01-22 at 6.45.23 PM.png (595 KB)
> Ruby_Code_of_Conduct_Numbers.png (119 KB)
> Ruby_Code_of_Conduct_Discussion.png (143 KB)
>
>
> --
> https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/
>
> Unsubscribe: <mailto:[e-mail]?subject=3Dunsubscrib=
e>
> <http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>
>



--=20
Austin Ziegler =E2=80=A2 [e-mail] =E2=80=A2 austin@halostatue.c=
a
http://www.halostatue.ca/ =E2=80=A2 http://twitter.com/halostatue

Unsubscribe: <mailto:[e-mail]?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>