Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:90903
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.50 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <56A5AD0E.3060701@gmail.com>
References: <023119E29B154072B09D82ED35C29C36@sharonc67d61d6>
	<56A573C2.4070202@allanmacgregor.com>
	<56A5AD0E.3060701@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 08:56:00 +0100
Message-ID: <CAB6YZuwbQ3DZ1K+-Kg8iTx=_GUpdr2jDzeA0bCygQKErJGQNfg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stanislav Malyshev <smalyshev@gmail.com>
Cc: amacgregor@allanmacgregor.com, PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] [Re-proposed] Adopt Code of Conduct
From: pajousek@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Pavel_Kou=C5=99il?=)

On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 6:05 AM, Stanislav Malyshev <smalyshev@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> Now, if we are still adamant on coming up with a CoC first I would like
>> to put forward the following 3 documents as alternatives for the
>> Contributor Covenant:
>>
>>
>> [A contribution policy for open source that
>> works](https://medium.com/@jmaynard/a-contribution-policy-for-open-source-that-works-bfc4600c9d83#.d53666v7u)
>
> This one deals with code contributions, but our discussion is wider. In
> fact, we never, as far as I could remember, had code contribution which
> was per se controversial. We did have ones that were controversial in
> that we disagreed on whether or not that code is doing what we actually
> want to do, but the code usually is not a problem.
>
>>
>> [The Code of
>> Merit](https://github.com/rosarior/Code-of-Merit/blob/master/CODE_OF_MERIT.md)
>
> I don't particularly like this approach, it sounds too defensive.
>

I already submitted it here once, so I'm skipping it - but I do
personally like how it says the project is about code.

>> [The Pragmatists Code of
>> Conduct](https://github.com/amacgregor/Pragmatists-Code-of-Conduct/blob/master/Prag-Code-of-Conduct.md)
>
>
> This one basically can be TLDRed as "behave as an adult". Which is nice
> if we were to agree what it means, but that is in no way automatic, thus
> I am afraid it is not enough :) Assuming good faith is a nice touch
> though, I like it.

Actually, IMHO it is totally enough. The best CoC would be just a CoC
with one point:
1. Be polite and behave like an adult.

This is still the second best approach though, the _best_ one is no CoC at all.

People need to realize one thing - not having a CoC doesn't make you
not welcoming or whatever; not listing all the SJW buzzwords in the
rules doesn't make something it unsafe place. Basically, I don't think
projects should act like a support group, but it seems it is the
direction the CoCs try to push them.

If somebody harrases you or something, you can always sue him - and
it's much more effective approach than reporting him to the projects
he is a part of.

Regards
Pavel Kouril