Coraline Ada Ehmke (via Twitter) pointed me to this: https://github.com/bantik/contributor_covenant
On 29 April 2014 17:54, Nick North <[email protected]> wrote: > I prefer the flavour of the Django one. The first point is, "Be welcoming, > friendly and patient" which feels to me to be about going out of your way > to help people and making a positive effort to be good, and the rest is in > the same spirit. The Debian one feels a bit less positive: "be wiling to > explain to others", "try to stay on topic" etc. The Django one also gives > examples of things you may be doing wrong, which can be helpful. But both > are good - I certainly wouldn't vote against something that looked like the > Debian one. > > Nick > > > On 29 April 2014 16:36, Noah Slater <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Perhaps we ought to take the best bits of both and stick it in a wiki >> page where we can collaboratively edit. There are a few things from my >> notes that I likely want to add in addition to both. >> >> >> On 29 April 2014 16:58, Joan Touzet <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Can I ask folks who prefer the Django one to the Debian one specially >> > why? Is there something in Django's that's not in Debian's? Is there >> stuff >> > in the Debian one that people don't like explicitlly? >> > >> > For me, I agree the Django one is shorter and better formatted, but it >> > seemed to cover less ground than the Debian one. >> > >> > -Joan >> > >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: "Nick North" <[email protected]> >> > To: [email protected] >> > Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2014 9:30:48 AM >> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Apache CouchDB Developer Code of Conduct >> > >> > +1 on the CoC idea. I also like the Django example as a starting point. >> And >> > definitely +1 on no profanity - plenty of people are offended by it, and >> > that in itself should be enough to rule it out. It also adds nothing to >> the >> > process of communicating ideas to the community. >> > >> > Nick >> > >> > >> > On 29 April 2014 13:15, Jason Smith <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> >> On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 6:56 PM, Mike Rhodes <[email protected] >> >> >wrote: >> >> >> >> > On 29 April 2014 11:18, Jason Smith <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > > Rule: No profanity >> >> > > >> >> > > Secondly, this is only a suspicion, but I think profanity (and also >> >> cocky >> >> > > faux hatred), is a shibboleth indicating manhood and that we are in >> a >> >> > > men-only club. It's like a loud fart or belch, or scratching your >> >> groin. >> >> > > Men generally curb that behavior in mixed company. It reminds me of >> >> bulls >> >> > > locking horns to impress a mate. Maybe F-bombs and the anger it >> stands >> >> > for >> >> > > are scaring some women away from software. Could be wrong, though. >> >> > >> >> > +1 to guidance against profanity, particularly casual. Crassness is >> >> > unpleasant. >> >> > >> >> > -1 to casual sexism that women don't swear, fart or scratch their >> >> crotches. >> >> > I know you didn't mean harm, but this trap is too easy to fall into >> and >> >> is >> >> > relevant here. >> >> > >> >> >> >> Well anyway I'm glad there's some momentum (if not yet consensus) to >> this >> >> idea. Thanks. >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Noah Slater >> https://twitter.com/nslater >> -- Noah Slater https://twitter.com/nslater
