I agree with both Tobias and Matthias that we should have a discussion about the roles of maintainers (since they have defined privileges on github) and changes to Sage's governance model more generally. Martin and Tobias have commented on trying to include some additional principles into the code of conduct, and I've asked John to include my revised suggestion into the PR <https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/37501>. This doesn't currently address all of Martin's points, so if anyone has other concrete changes to suggest feel free to do it here or on the PR.
In the interest of moving forward, I'm planning on giving the PR positive review on Thursday. Of course, additional changes are always possible through a discussion here if we find that there are more that we want to add. David On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 2:45 PM Matthias Koeppe <matthiaskoe...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think it's important to point out that a "Code of Conduct" is merely one > document, of limited scope and purpose. > > In particular it does not touch matters of *governance* of a project. > Open source projects with very different governance structures can share > the same Code of Conduct. > > Questions such as "who can / should set status labels", "who can / should > edit others' Issue/PR descriptions", etc. are primarily questions of > governance, namely of *roles* in a project (and the associated duties and > privileges of people in the role). > > This is a discussion that the project also needs to have quite urgently, > but I suggest to get to this after the vote on the Code of Conduct and the > appointment of the new CoC committee. > > Matthias > > On Friday, March 1, 2024 at 2:49:37 AM UTC-8 Martin R wrote: > >> I would like to ask whether we might want to add some of the following to >> the code of conduct, I could not find it covered there. >> >> I admit that it is unclear to me whether the discussion should be on pull >> requests only. I don't want to add the following to John's pull request, >> because it definitely doesn't belong there. Opening another one makes >> things even harder to follow, so I'm trying to be brave. >> >> I imagine that the issues below may be cultural things, so I would >> perfectly understand that all or some of it is perfectly OK in some >> communities, and therefore should not be part of the sage code of conduct. >> >> I also admit that some of the issues below are attitudes that make it >> hard for me to work on sage. There were some situations in which I would >> possibly have stopped contributing to sage, if sage wasn't a professional >> necessity for me. >> >> 0. sage is a community effort, and not the project of a single or even a >> few persons. Try to not identify yourself with the code in sage. >> 1. It is not OK to judge somebody else's attempts to improve sage other >> than critisising it technically or casting a negative vote. By contrast, >> emphasising the positive aspects and appreciating the effort is welcome. >> 2. It is not OK to emphasise oneselves contributions or stressing that >> one has been right. By contrast, it is fine to express that one is happy >> or perhaps even proud to have solved a particular technical problem. >> 3. It is not OK to modify the description of a pull request or issue of >> somebody else without explicit permission, ideally on the ticket so that >> the permission is visible to all readers. >> 4. It is not OK to change a pull request to "positive review" if someone >> has already expressed explicitly that it shouldn't be merged, and there >> hasn't been a vote. >> >> Comments and variations, but also saying that this should not be >> discussed for a particular reason: welcome! >> >> Best wishes, >> >> Martin >> On Wednesday 28 February 2024 at 22:24:29 UTC+1 John H Palmieri wrote: >> >>> Dear colleagues, >>> >>> I am working on some changes to Sage's Code of Conduct, and I am asking >>> for comments. Once the draft has stabilized, then we will hold a vote on >>> sage-devel to approve (or not) the changes. Please visit >>> https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/37501 to see the proposal. >>> >>> The current Code of Conduct was approved by a vote in sage-devel almost >>> 10 years ago. My intention is not to alter the core principles in the Code >>> of Conduct, but instead to add more details: for example, how should you >>> report a possible violation, what are possible consequences if the Sage >>> Code of Conduct Committee (what has until now been called the Sage Abuse >>> Committee) finds that a violation occurred, how to amend the document, etc. >>> The changes are based in large part on similar documents from SciPy and >>> NumFOCUS: we are not reinventing the wheel. >>> >>> As such, I hope that the proposed changes are (a) not controversial, and >>> (b) a clear improvement. I could certainly be wrong about either of these, >>> but I will make this suggestion: if you agree with me about (a) and (b) and >>> you also want to propose changes that are potentially more controversial, >>> then I would ask that you make that proposal separately so that the Sage >>> community can vote on it separately, and the changes can be merged >>> independently of each other. >>> >>> Please take a look and leave comments on the PR. >>> >>> -- >>> John >>> >>> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "sage-devel" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/432caff6-9fc6-4e0c-927f-e64c083bacacn%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/432caff6-9fc6-4e0c-927f-e64c083bacacn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/CAChs6_%3Dp%2BnW5KMP%3DGZUvuEMRqGsRHsu%2BOY7-KKuchJh7fu%2B1bg%40mail.gmail.com.
