The most likely way for people to see codes of conduct is through
repositories, which lets them know they have some way to combat harassment
in the tool they're using to try to contribute to a particular repository.
It makes sense to have a CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md in the repos; however, if all
the repos are using the same policy, it's often better to have a minimal
CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md that simply says "This repo is governed by the blah blah
code of conduct, specified here: <link>". This makes it possible to have a
single boilerplate code of conduct without needing to update every repo
whenever the CoC changes.
It's a reasonable ask to have the file there, and this discussion feels
like a thinly veiled argument against CoCs as a whole. If you're so against
the md file, or against the CoC as a whole, github and/or gitlab are fine
places to host a repository.
On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 5:39 PM, John <phoenixoverride(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Honestly I find forcing documentation into repos to be
abrasive, and
overstepping the bounds of the CoC.I also find the behavior of those
pushing such an approach to be hostile and overly aggressive. Why do you
need to force a copy of the CoC into every repo? Why not keep it in a
central location? What kind of mess would you need to cleanup if for some
reason you needed to adjust the contents of that file? Instead of having
one location to update you now have 800+ copies that need fixed.
On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 8:23 PM, Yaron Koren <yaron(a)wikiworks.com> wrote:
Chris Koerner <nobelx at gmail.com>
wrote:
> “Please just assume for the sake of this discussion that (a) I'm
willing
> to abide by the rules of the Code of
Conduct, and (b) I don't want the
> CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md file in my extensions.”
> Ok, hear me out here. What if I told you those two things are
> incompatible? That abiding by the community agreements requires the
file
> as an explicit declaration of said
agreement. That is to say, if we had
> a discussion about amending the CoC to be explicit about this
expectation
> you wouldn’t have issues with including it?
Or at least you’d be OK
with
it?
Brian is right that adding a requirement to include this file to the CoC
would be an odd move. But, if it did happen, I don't know - I suppose I'd
have two choices: either include the files or remove my code. I would be
an
improvement over the current situation in at
least one way: we would know
that rules are still created in an orderly, consensus-like way, as
opposed
to now, where a small group of developers can
apparently make up rules as
they go along.
-Yaron
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l