I think there's a lot of misunderstanding on this whole thing.
The issue pointed out was that the CoC makes a false feeling of protection by being in extensions that are developed outside WMF's technical spaces. That is if I had an issue with an extension's maintainer WMF would refuse to help as it wasn't in WMF's technical spaces as per the CoC.
This has probably been interpreted as maintainers are against CoC. However, if the CoC.md file were to claim that the authors support a specific Code of Conduct it would probably be fine.
Also I would like to note that I have immense respect and thanks for the WMF devs for their hard work on maintenance on all of these extensions.
Regards, Nischay Nahata
On Sat, Jun 9, 2018 at 11:58 PM Brian Wolff bawolff@gmail.com wrote:
Taking a step back here...
I agree with you in principle...but
Shared spaces imply that occasionally disputes are going to arise as to what belongs in a repo. If we dont have a fair method of resolving such disputes (/my way or the highway/ is not fair), then this model is not going to work.
-- Brian
On Saturday, June 9, 2018, Brion Vibber bvibber@wikimedia.org wrote:
I'd just like to apologize for dragging the other thread into this one
and
being overly personal and failing to assume good faith.
That was a failing on my part, and not good practice.
Please if you respond further to this thread, treat only the narrow issue of ownership / maintainership expectations and where/how we should be
more
clear on it.
Further discussion on people's motives about the code of conduct will likely not be productive for anyone on this thread.
My apologies to all; I should do better. You all deserve better.
-- brion _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l