All, On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 4:06 PM, Anthony Ferrara <ircmax...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hey all, > > I have created a new RFC for the PHP Project to adopt the Contributor > Covenant as the official Code of Conduct for the project > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/adopt-code-of-conduct > > Let me know what you think or if there are any concerns > > Thanks > > Anthony
In response to significant feedback here and elsewhere, I have expanded the text of the RFC significantly. It now includes the text of the Contributor Covenant 1.3.0 as well as including verbage about updating it requiring an RFC. I included a vote requirement for course of actions of 4/5 of the CoC team. I also included content about the "Reasonable Person Test", explicitly stating that it shall be assumed that both parties are acting as reasonable people until proven otherwise by significant evidence. It also stipulates that reporting an incident does not excuse someone from the CoC (meaning victims are still bound to follow it, and are not excused from proper behavior because of a violation). I also made it explicit that potential actions should be a last resort, and that the CoC team should make every reasonable attempt to defuse the situation without having to resort to "punishment". I also removed the ability to remove commit karma from the team, instead including that in the "ban" category (meaning that the CoC team is no longer allowed to remove commit karma long-term without the action of internals@) Additionally, I added a line specifying that bans (temporary or permanent) should only be used in egregious cases. I added a section on transparency, Conflict of Interest (though this needs expanding) and accountability (giving internals@ the ability to "overturn" any action by the CoC team with a vote of 50%+1). I also made it explicit that accused people have a right to confidentiality as long as no action is taken by the team. I also added a section on appeals. Those are the changes to the RFC as it stands. Please review them. As to the comments in this thread, I won't reply to every one, but here are a few points I'd like to make. It's been mentioned that we may want to adopt a CoC, but it shouldn't "have teeth". I disagree here, as without an enforcement mechanism it basically is no different from where we are at today. Saying we should act reasonable is fine, but we need a method for what we are to do when one of us acts unreasonably. Additionally, as has been stated, requiring people to report publicly creates a barrier to entry. Many people will simply chose to leave quietly rather than report publicly. Simply look at the way people who speak out about harassment are treated in public to understand why. The point of the CoC is to create a safe place for everyone to contribute, not just those with thick skin. As to why the Contributor Covenant as opposed to another CoC or our own custom one, there are two reasons for this. First, it's a standard that's been adopted by a number of significant scale projects. Second, it saves us from having to bikeshed over every single word of a CoC. If there's another standard CoC that we should entertain, I'm happy to look at it. But I do not believe that we should create our own. As far as the conflict resolution process, that I am open to expanding or retracting as much as practical. I do think it's important to have, but would be happy to take advice from groups like Drupal who have done this before. To those that say this is a solution in search of a problem, it very well may be. But that doesn't mean it isn't important to do. You could say the same thing about smoke detectors. Even if you've never had a fire, that doesn't mean it isn't good practice to install protection from one. In this case, we simply do not know if or how many contributors we may have lost due to incidents covered by a CoC. Even if that number is 0, does that mean it's not worth installing one to prevent it in the future? Thanks, Anthony -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
