Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:90794 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 70660 invoked from network); 21 Jan 2016 16:25:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 21 Jan 2016 16:25:56 -0000 X-Host-Fingerprint: 178.62.40.5 ajf.me Received: from [178.62.40.5] ([178.62.40.5:12106] helo=localhost.localdomain) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 69/6C-09073-39601A65 for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2016 11:25:55 -0500 Message-ID: <69.6C.09073.39601A65@pb1.pair.com> To: internals@lists.php.net References: <43.8B.22511.75120A65@pb1.pair.com> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 16:25:52 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:42.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/42.0 SeaMonkey/2.39 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Posted-By: 178.62.40.5 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Re-proposed] Adopt Code of Conduct From: ajf@ajf.me (Andrea Faulds) Hi, Zeev Suraski wrote: >> I wouldn't say the idea of a code of conduct is really a constitution per se (it's >> not setting down the foundation and goals of the PHP project, merely rules >> for misconduct) > > Should somehow this RFC get ratified, it would be by far the closest thing that the PHP project will have for a constitution. > For what it's worth, I find the description 'rules for misconduct' extremely telling and fairly horrible way to describe a Code of Conduct, as I'm sure any people involved with education would agree. Why? Misconduct is simply the inversion of 'conduct', and a code of conduct, necessarily, primarily deals with misconduct. Good conduct is supposed to be what normally happens. It's the exceptions to that - misconduct - that you need a code to manage. > >> But we don't really have an alternative process for this currently established, >> so an RFC is the best we can do. > > Oh, but we do. As I'm sure many of us remember, PHP existed for 15 years before the RFC process, and it actually became the most popular language on the planet during that time. Yes, the RFC process made things go quicker and evolution faster - but given it was designed for technical decisions and administrative items - not constitutional ones - it cannot be used here. > > Namely - decision by consensus. This is absolutely required in a topic as far-reaching as this, which is very clearly outside the scope of the RFC process. What do you consider to constitute consensus? Absolute unanimity, or large majority support? > >> RFC revival is essentially like forking, and that's always allowed in open- >> source. > > We have clear rules which disallow revival of RFCs which failed a vote for a duration of six months, unless they're very substantially modified, so revival isn't always allowed in open source. Yes, that's true, but withdrawing an RFC isn't failing a vote. It doesn't say anything about whether the community is against the proposal, it only means the person proposing it is no longer able and/or willing to carry it forward personally. > > Maybe I'm a cynic, but when I saw that the RFC was withdrawn, I was (almost) literally counting the minutes before someone came, in the electronic equivalent of a shining armor, to revive it. It's also clear that had Derick not done it, someone else would have. Sure, because it's a proposal that a lot of people support. Again, think back to the Scalar Type Declarations discussion. The moment I left, Anthony picked up the tab. I never asked him to, and in fact I was scared that me leaving would doom the project. Also, Stas picked up the spaceship RFC, and I never asked him to do that. It's pretty much democracy in action. If some popular proposal is abandoned, inevitably someone in the community will want to pick it up. I suppose it means people should just plan to properly hand things over rather than quit, given how fairly inevitable someone else picks these things up again, but nobody is acting in bad faith here. Also, it's not actually inevitable that things are picked up. When I quit in February 2015, some of my proposals died then and there. Nobody rode in with shining armour on their glorious battle elePHPant to "save" them. > Maybe I'm a cynic #2, but to me, it's an attempt to make a point in an undue manner. It's not a terribly nice way to make a point, for sure, but I don't think that's really the intent in most cases. After the uh, controversy, that things like this RFC and the Scalar Types saga provoke, I couldn't personally blame anyone for getting sick of it and being unable to go on. > And I don't think that should be allowed. I think we all have bigger fish to fry right now though, so that's not something I'm going to actively argue on - especially as the current Voting RFC doesn't detail that. I'm merely stating my opinion. Fair enough. >>> Third, on undue pressure. >>> Certain people have either implied or outright said that not having a CoC >> will make them reconsider actively contributing to PHP. This is undue >> pressure IMHO, avoiding the use of bigger words. >> >> It might leave others feeling pressured > > s/might/absolutely does. > >> , but it's not their fault if those >> contributors feel unsafe without a code of conduct. > > I'll state right here that I find it virtually impossible to believe that the abovementioned individuals feel *unsafe* because of the lack of a CoC. Well, I, personally, do not feel entirely safe in this discussion. Safety is subjective, sure, but nobody can say whether someone else feels unsafe, only they themselves. Seeing what has happened to countless people that have spoken up online about harassment, and knowing that I contribute under my actual real-life name, has made me self-censor to some extent. I decided not to revive the CoC RFC myself for a reason. Seeing certain participants in the code of conduct discussion openly retweet messages by leaders of organised harassment campaigns, campaigns targeting people like me, is absolutely terrifying. Unlike some people, I have the misfortune of having been on the Internet when I was very young. I've said enough silly things online that if someone wants to make my life absolute hell, they definitely can. Now, so far I've been okay. But maybe that's because I've only made relatively mild criticisms of the code of conduct on this mailing list, and been mostly quiet on the more public platform of Twitter. Maybe that's because I've refrained from naming certain people during discussions. My fear here does not come from the PHP mailing list. PHP internals, for all its "toxic kindergarten"-ness, is mostly civil. We're not the Linux Kernel Mailing List, and I think that's something we can all be proud of. The broader PHP community, however, is not always quite so friendly. The mailing list is not isolated from this: anyone can join at any time. Indeed, the code of conduct discussion has already brought new members. We don't exist in a vacuum. -- Andrea Faulds https://ajf.me/