On 26/09/2019 08:20, Jeff King wrote: > On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 04:52:56PM -0700, Emily Shaffer wrote: >> I helped my other FOSS project to adopt a Code of Conduct earlier in >> the year (https://github.com/openbmc/docs/blob/master/code-of-conduct.md) >> and we got around this by asking for volunteers from the technical >> steering committee to agree to have their contact info listed on the >> escalation path; at the end of the escalation path we also listed >> someone external to the project (which we were able to do because we >> had been adopted by the Linux Foundation, and they have someone for >> that). > > Yeah, I think this is sort of the same thing except that I > pre-volunteered the whole project committee. ;) > > We could have a separate list of contacts for the code of conduct, but > it seems simplest to just use the existing group that we already have, > unless there's a compelling reason not to.
I, too, wondered if it might be more appropriate to have the list of names and email addresses separated from the repository and just linked from the CoC. Perhaps someone would need to expunge themselves from the list permanently, or perhaps we'd want to protect against a hypothetical person in a position of control changing the list to their trusted cronies. I cannot think of a realistic scenario or practical setup which would actually guarantee any such benefits and this solution is simple and practical. Overall for this proposed CoC patch: ACK CB
