On Sun, Mar 10, 2024 at 1:44 PM seb....@gmail.com <seb.oe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Personally I don't mind if a maintainer would correct my typos in the PR > description (or something else according to Volker's white list). However, > since this is a privileged action and we cannot be sure that everyone feels > this way, I think this point should be addressed generally. Perhaps the > Code of Conduct could specify that permissions for cloud services that are > technically necessary to maintain the project should generally not be used > for other purposes unless there is agreement from all affected persons. > One thing to note is that when you make a pull request on github you have the option to opt out <https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/collaborating-with-pull-requests/working-with-forks/allowing-changes-to-a-pull-request-branch-created-from-a-fork> of these kinds of changes by maintainers. I think it's good to add pointers to this in our documentation about making and reviewing PRs, as well as clarify what kind of changes are acceptable. I think I agree with Matthias' suggestion <https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/37501#issuecomment-1987309496> that these kinds of guidelines are better put in our reviewing code rather than the Code of Conduct, since they feel more like details than guiding principles. David > David Roe schrieb am Sonntag, 10. März 2024 um 16:44:06 UTC+1: > >> 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 <matthia...@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+...@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/f0fb899b-9871-43b0-877e-00a9602520d2n%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/f0fb899b-9871-43b0-877e-00a9602520d2n%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_nk2f9DqSFeYnRz8PgzkDx%2B0joJjbxrkL8_uv-LKosDaA%40mail.gmail.com.
