Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:91356
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)
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <CAMTdTS_vNLE9axiTsQYEVeiQtfKBD37cwNQ1OmeWp9=YuesSxw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <56CC4211.7000207@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 11:27:13 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAMTdTS_vNLE9axiTsQYEVeiQtfKBD37cwNQ1OmeWp9=YuesSxw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Adopt Ruby Code of Conduct
From: rowan.collins@gmail.com (Rowan Collins)

benjamin barber wrote on 19/02/2016 13:08:
>> The Ruby Community Conduct Guideline
>> We have picked the following conduct guideline based on an early draft of
>> the PostgreSQL CoC

It's interesting to know what other communities are doing. I understand 
Postgres are in a similar position to us - they have some initial 
principles, and are discussing what if any formal Code of Conduct to 
build on top of them. It sounds like Ruby have picked up those principles.


> Most importantly it doesn't allow a persons feelings, to
> override the technical merits of a persons arguments, as critics of the
> SystemD have been labeled as violating the code of conduct.
>
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/2014-July/451692.html

I'm not sure what this link is intended to demonstrate. Without reading 
every message on the referenced thread, I can't tell whether the warning 
was valid; and without knowing anything about the CoC in question, or 
the structure of that particular community, I have no idea what 
authority that poster had to give the warning, and what the implications 
of doing so are. I certainly don't see any individuals being "labeled" 
in that post, or any suggestion that the technical merit of their 
arguments should be ignored.

Regards,
-- 
Rowan Collins
[IMSoP]