Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:90726 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 77438 invoked from network); 20 Jan 2016 17:19:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 20 Jan 2016 17:19:05 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=ircmaxell@gmail.com; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=ircmaxell@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.51 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: ircmaxell@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 74.125.82.51 mail-wm0-f51.google.com Received: from [74.125.82.51] ([74.125.82.51:38095] helo=mail-wm0-f51.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id F8/B1-56920-881CF965 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 12:19:04 -0500 Received: by mail-wm0-f51.google.com with SMTP id b14so40615969wmb.1 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 09:19:04 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=v7TtO8swEil9wKgEcbFAn0jiFBiLCt7r0wblOjF0xmc=; b=F1R/I8VMI5wAMhkN4M6Z0FiedW+X9eSWHCuCvMy5cfZhtjzVByerQ1GiaD4zML3ZFV wAkHRKY6IaOTXCZxeq6Fsmvhq1Diz3G90tSdZt/WTBzPEnDh/dzStsrEAsP2wpKiEPIN U0FY1njLijVHcNA480vCwKVPwSbcbqSMKsyaPoxIsPYQmcCSrsf4n2v5pboEQRlAybsb Vstcpk7iWWTkNhP+/ytQz4gRchhGkXYpa1Pra2i+SfQP1Es0FcS0hlO9sx/939jiKAk+ i91os2Oei2pL189YN05IaZcjOQzIIYm4IlGfKwOXkMxOykY/QcTNJPUe2fzyGAAIJY/n lJxA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=v7TtO8swEil9wKgEcbFAn0jiFBiLCt7r0wblOjF0xmc=; b=Dq6Iiry1sWoVPlHpG7qQLxZwtSZFNyeD1AFkmoOfTUFwK0UEkEhEIzxyU7aSwVvt1c BpcT4NiklRoKsLaj2f1bbCxoUVV9HsKDRoK+fHWdN9TQgEF57R/y6dy2alsks2tC6+lU mhvk/JNKG0MnmCPLU2JDxpmiJvoVa2SgIaOG3qBrXj8/g5235F3a2Sxe9syiDSLAHplZ 2C2kMT7ia3dL1iCJChbOBXskg3hFn50JBr9Za7nuPTqIwl2bBq/aESTOyHKaVNqlTYVv rvUarMnJrYYgkC9bK0+HmwHbGo1AIqkp5EWQp4A5fiPh5sbhrk44xyUNldDn4AN/rLXz YQKA== X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOSvLcN5GJ3w50MlZg7nhKR0rwl9BYJ+0IWAwFylqijcfKhwyhkFNHClnkyLaVfIvMv1pmKB3jjGfcF+PQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.28.225.132 with SMTP id y126mr5452264wmg.98.1453310340889; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 09:19:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.28.11.77 with HTTP; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 09:19:00 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 12:19:00 -0500 Message-ID: To: "internals@lists.php.net" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Subject: [RFC] [Withdrawn] Adopt Code of Conduct From: ircmaxell@gmail.com (Anthony Ferrara) All, I've decided to withdraw the CoC RFC. There are many reasons for it, but there are a few points I want to make. As to the content of the RFC, when I initially proposed it, I selected the Contributor Covenant due to it being a well adopted standard. Several people raised objections to it, and I was completely open to changing it. But the more objections I see, the more I feel the nature of the objections actually justifies the Covenant as the choice rather than justifies switching it. The more I hear people complain about the "scope of applicability" being outside the project, the more it's apparent that many (not all, but many) simply don't want to need to think about their actions in other contexts. Some will claim that ambiguity will lead to abuse, but the underlying idea is "treat people with respect". And as long as you do that, all will be fine. And while several would rather see a CoC that focuses on "positive behavior", to me that's not what a CoC is for. The CoC is to take a stand and say "this is what we will not tolerate". Positive behavior should be encourage in another "Contributing" document. Where you detail how people should contribute. The CoC is a mechanism for people to feel safe. And safety is achieved by taking a stand. As far as voting on just the CoC without a private reporting mechanism (which implies some degree of "teeth"), I've made it clear that I don't believe that's tenable. I believe that asking people to go public with every incident defeats the entire point of having a CoC. I am also not happy with the RFC in its current state (I've been clear about that since day one). But I also have no further energy to evolve it further. Hence, there is nothing left for me to do but withdraw it. Thanks Anthony