: Jan Danielsson; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] CoC [Final v2]
On 01/26/2016 09:03 AM, Jan Danielsson wrote:
> On 24/01/16 18:30, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Hello,
This thread is deprecated. The CoC Final Draft has been submitted to -core for
final modification, acceptance
On 01/26/2016 09:03 AM, Jan Danielsson wrote:
On 24/01/16 18:30, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Hello,
This thread is deprecated. The CoC Final Draft has been submitted to
-core for final modification, acceptance or decline.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
--
Command Prompt, Inc. http
On 24/01/16 18:30, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
[---]
> This is something that I brought up in protest because I believe that it
> is crucial to the growth of this community.
Do you have any evidence to support this belief? (Without referring
to an anonymous invisible mass, a single case or unverifi
Just to respond to Josh's previous question:
Yes, I ike the current code of conduct. Much prefer to the alternatives
offered aimed at "feeling safe" (for the reason that keeping the peace in a
culturally diverse community will not allow people that luxury all the
time).
I am not convinced we nee
Hello,
This thread is deprecated. The CoC Final Draft has been submitted to
-core for final modification, acceptance or decline.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
--
Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/
+1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stac
On 1/25/2016 8:39 AM, Brian Dunavant wrote:
Of interesting note, the Ruby community is currently considering
switching to a CoC inspired directly from this draft of a Postgres
CoC. The extremely long conversation can be viewed at:
https://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/12004
again, people the
>> Participation does not need to be limited to copy-editing. Of all the
>> ways to develop a community CoC, we're engaged in just about the worst
>> possible one right now.
>
> so what would be a better way of developing this ?
Of interesting note, the Ruby community is currently considering
swi
On Jan 24, 2016, at 6:09 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
> so what would be a better way of developing this ?
This needs to come from -core, and then commented on as a complete policy, not
just CoC with maybe enforcement provisions later. Not because we're a
dictatorship, but if they are going to be
On 1/24/2016 5:52 PM, Christophe Pettus wrote:
Participation does not need to be limited to copy-editing. Of all the ways to
develop a community CoC, we're engaged in just about the worst possible one
right now.
so what would be a better way of developing this ?
--
john r pierce, recyclin
On 01/24/2016 02:59 PM, Chris Travers wrote:
But I will be crystal clear on my (deeply political ;-) viewpoint here:
I do not want to see the PostgreSQL community get hijacked by groups
that want to push Western values on the rest of the world. I want to
see us come together and build one heck
On Jan 24, 2016, at 5:35 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> You are wrong and the fact that we have gone from a motion style, to a story
> style, to a continually and incrementally improving draft proves it. This is
> the largest feature the community has tried to design and implement. It is
> goin
On Jan 24, 2016, at 5:25 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> In retrospect I revoke my support of this idea entirely. It just isn't our
> jurisdiction. If doesn't happen in our yard then it isn't our business.
Then know that the current draft of the CoC is easily interpreted as giving
shelter to abus
On 01/24/2016 05:20 PM, Christophe Pettus wrote:
On Jan 24, 2016, at 5:15 PM, "Joshua D. Drake" wrote:
Based on our structure it doesn't work that way. At a minimum we will come up
with a CoC and it will be passed to -core for final approval. -core will then
also define how they want implem
On 01/24/2016 02:42 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
1. If person B is not in the Pg community then it is up to the Rails community
to deal with it.
2. If person B is in the Pg community they can request help.
I am open to wording on #2. I tried a couple of times but had trouble not
making it a l
On Jan 24, 2016, at 5:15 PM, "Joshua D. Drake" wrote:
> Based on our structure it doesn't work that way. At a minimum we will come up
> with a CoC and it will be passed to -core for final approval. -core will then
> also define how they want implement it (or even turn us down). We are just
>
On 01/24/2016 02:51 PM, Christophe Pettus wrote:
On Jan 24, 2016, at 2:48 PM, "David E. Wheeler" wrote:
I think that’s planned for a separate document, to be linked.
I think those need to put in place at the same time. It's very hard to judge
how good or bad a CoC is absent a reporting me
On 01/24/2016 02:42 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
How do you define “in the Pg community”? Is it someone who has posted to a
known forum at least once? Someone who has been to a conference? What if they
have never participated in a community forum, but use PostgreSQL at work? Maybe
they would e
On 01/24/2016 02:41 PM, Christophe Pettus wrote:
On Jan 22, 2016, at 6:47 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
== PostgreSQL Community Code of Conduct (CoC) ==
What is missing from this, first and foremost, is a reporting and resolution
mechanism. If someone feels the CoC has been violated, who do
On 1/24/2016 2:51 PM, Christophe Pettus wrote:
I'd respectfully suggest that we table the discussion of the CoC text at this
point, let the high passions moderate a bit, and talk about the process. That
is the detail in which the devils will live.
Oh, save us from that.my original
On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 11:14 PM, David E. Wheeler
wrote:
> On Jan 24, 2016, at 11:28 AM, Chris Travers
> wrote:
>
> >> * PostgreSQL is a community project and takes no position on any
> >> political question aside from its usage in the public sector (which we
> >> support). We expect communica
On Jan 24, 2016, at 2:48 PM, "David E. Wheeler" wrote:
> I think that’s planned for a separate document, to be linked.
I think those need to put in place at the same time. It's very hard to judge
how good or bad a CoC is absent a reporting mechanism.
I'd respectfully suggest that we table th
On Jan 24, 2016, at 2:41 PM, Christophe Pettus wrote:
> What is missing from this, first and foremost, is a reporting and resolution
> mechanism. If someone feels the CoC has been violated, who do they talk to?
> How does that person or entity resolve things? What confidentiality promises
>
On Jan 24, 2016, at 2:34 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> O.k. now I am starting to see your point. For example:
o_O
> Pg person A is harassing person B in the Rails community.
>
> How do we deal with that?
>
> 1. If person B is not in the Pg community then it is up to the Rails
> community to d
On Jan 22, 2016, at 6:47 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> == PostgreSQL Community Code of Conduct (CoC) ==
What is missing from this, first and foremost, is a reporting and resolution
mechanism. If someone feels the CoC has been violated, who do they talk to?
How does that person or entity reso
On 01/24/2016 02:14 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
Suppose someone from a divisive organization using PostgreSQL were to make a
speech at a PostgreSQL conference about a technical topic. Would that be
off-limits just because they are politically divisive as an organization?
If they make hatefu
On Jan 24, 2016, at 11:28 AM, Chris Travers wrote:
>> * PostgreSQL is a community project and takes no position on any
>> political question aside from its usage in the public sector (which we
>> support). We expect communication in community fora to respect this
>> need. The community is neith
...@commandprompt.com]
Sent: 24 January 2016 17:31
To: Geoff Winkless; FarjadFarid(ChkNet); Postgres General
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] CoC [Final v2]
On 01/24/2016 07:36 AM, Geoff Winkless wrote:
> We'll just need you and Dave to sign a legally binding contract that
> you will provide in
FarjadFarid(ChkNet); Postgres General
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] CoC [Final v2]
On 24 January 2016 at 14:53, FarjadFarid(ChkNet)
wrote:
> I do agree with Dave on the points he has made.
>
> Can we please add these so everyone is happy and finalise the CoC?
Sure, why not? Forget that at least 50%
On 01/24/2016 11:28 AM, Chris Travers wrote:
That won't work. The community does take positions. A good example
is when -core denounced the topless dancers at the Russian
conference. That position was taken without consideration that at a
lot of this community doesn't care, won't
On 01/24/2016 12:28 PM, Chris Travers wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 6:34 PM, Joshua D. Drake
> mailto:j...@commandprompt.com>> wrote: On
> 01/24/2016 08:13 AM, Chris Travers wrote:
>
> If I could make one proposal for an additional clause:
>
> * PostgreSQL is a community project and takes no p
On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 6:34 PM, Joshua D. Drake
wrote:
> On 01/24/2016 08:13 AM, Chris Travers wrote:
>
> If I could make one proposal for an additional clause:
>>
>> * PostgreSQL is a community project and takes no position on any
>> political question aside from its usage in the public sector
Josh,
Two changes I would like to the Coc as it stands:
> * Participants must ensure that their language and actions are free
> of personal attacks and disparaging personal remarks.
Change the word "must" to "try to".
You yourself said some people have called you sexist and against obese peopl
On 01/24/2016 09:44 AM, Geoff Winkless wrote:
On 24 January 2016 at 17:30, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
If you are participating in this thread, be productive. If you are going to
be sarcastic and not helpful, get off the thread.
And as for being not helpful, I was being helpful and my helpful and
On 01/24/2016 09:39 AM, Geoff Winkless wrote:
On 24 January 2016 at 17:30, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Sarcasm is not productive.
Actually I wasn't being sarcastic. OK, I was being sarcastic in the
first paragraph, but not the second :p
The most significant problem I see with the Contributor Cove
On 24 January 2016 at 17:30, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> If you are participating in this thread, be productive. If you are going to
> be sarcastic and not helpful, get off the thread.
And as for being not helpful, I was being helpful and my helpful and
reasoned points were ignored because they simp
On 24 January 2016 at 17:34, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> That won't work. The community does take positions. A good example is when
> -core denounced the topless dancers at the Russian conference. That position
> was taken without consideration that at a lot of this community doesn't
> care, won't ca
On 24 January 2016 at 17:30, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Sarcasm is not productive.
Actually I wasn't being sarcastic. OK, I was being sarcastic in the
first paragraph, but not the second :p
The most significant problem I see with the Contributor Covenant
(other than my personal feeling that Postgr
On 01/24/2016 08:13 AM, Chris Travers wrote:
If I could make one proposal for an additional clause:
* PostgreSQL is a community project and takes no position on any
political question aside from its usage in the public sector (which we
support). We expect communication in community fora to res
On 01/24/2016 07:36 AM, Geoff Winkless wrote:
We'll just need you and Dave to sign a legally binding contract that
you will provide indemnity for any and all actions that might come
about as a result, in all locations worldwide. Oh, and you'll need to
pay the legal fees for lawyers (your own and
On 01/24/2016 02:34 AM, Chris Travers wrote:
We need to also cover abuse by members of the community made
outside the community. Otherwise we’ll appear to give safe
harbor to abusers.
The private lives of members are the private lives of members. Let
whatever sp
On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 4:52 PM, S McGraw wrote:
> On 01/24/2016 07:53 AM, FarjadFarid(ChkNet) wrote:
> > I do agree with Dave on the points he has made. Can we please add
> > these so everyone is happy and finalise the CoC?
> >
> >> From: pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org [mailto:
> pgsql-gener
On 01/24/2016 07:53 AM, FarjadFarid(ChkNet) wrote:
> I do agree with Dave on the points he has made. Can we please add
> these so everyone is happy and finalise the CoC?
>
>> From: pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org
>> [mailto:pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of David E. Wheeler
>>
ge-
> From: pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org [mailto:
> pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of David E. Wheeler
> Sent: 24 January 2016 00:01
> To: Josh Drake
> Cc: Psql_General (E-mail)
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] CoC [Final v2]
>
> On Jan 22, 2016, at 6:47 PM, Joshua
On 24 January 2016 at 14:53, FarjadFarid(ChkNet)
wrote:
> I do agree with Dave on the points he has made.
>
> Can we please add these so everyone is happy and finalise the CoC?
Sure, why not? Forget that at least 50% (I'm being generous) of the
contributors to the thread disagree, we'll just do w
:01
To: Josh Drake
Cc: Psql_General (E-mail)
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] CoC [Final v2]
On Jan 22, 2016, at 6:47 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> This document provides community guidelines for a safe, respectful,
> productive, and collaborative place for any person who is willing to
> contribu
On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 1:40 AM, Joshua D. Drake
wrote:
> On 01/23/2016 04:00 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
>
>> On Jan 22, 2016, at 6:47 PM, Joshua D. Drake
>> wrote:
>>
>> This document provides community guidelines for a safe, respectful,
>>> productive, and collaborative place for any person w
On 01/23/2016 04:00 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
On Jan 22, 2016, at 6:47 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
This document provides community guidelines for a safe, respectful, productive, and
collaborative place for any person who is willing to contribute to the PostgreSQL
community. It applies to a
On Jan 22, 2016, at 6:47 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> This document provides community guidelines for a safe, respectful,
> productive, and collaborative place for any person who is willing to
> contribute to the PostgreSQL community. It applies to all "collaborative
> space", which is defined
Hello,
I have been in Pasadena the last few days and wasn't able to respond. I
believe we are very close to finishing this up. Based on the comments I
have seen in the previous CoC [Final] thread, I have come up with the
following:
== PostgreSQL Community Code of Conduct (CoC) ==
This docum
49 matches
Mail list logo
