Re: [python-committers] More explicit Code of Conduct for the issue tracker & core mailing lists?
Le 16/07/2015 07:34, Brett Cannon a écrit : > And three, we need a CoC. Not to explicitly call anyone out, but in the > past week or so I have heard peoples' ideas called "ridiculous" and been > told to "shut up" on various mailing lists. Which mailing-lists? AFAIK, the CoC would be for python-dev and python-ideas so, if any other MLs are under discussion, it would be good to know. > I have met people at PyCon > numerous times who have viewed at least python-dev as at minimum cold > and possibly hostile to people, Each time someone voices such an opinion, it would be nice to get an example from them, and how they feel the welcome should have been like instead. Otherwise it will be hard to make any rational progress. Propagating such opinions could further defeat the purpose (self-reinforcing opinions, or "memes", abound). Regards Antoine. > and that's simply not the kind of > environment I would like to foster. I honestly think all of us -- > including me -- have been way too tolerant of core devs having bad > attitudes and not calling them out on it, especially when they simply > got too passionate and lost their composure (the magic of email is we > can think before we send so tolerating outbursts of any regularity > really shouldn't happen). Part of this tolerance for bad attitudes has > been cultural, but having a CoC would help to start changing that by > making people feel comfortable in standing up and stating they thought > someone had been rude. > > Anyway, that's why I support having a CoC that applies to everything > involving Python's development. > > -Brett from a tablet ___ python-committers mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Re: [python-committers] More explicit Code of Conduct for the issue tracker & core mailing lists?
Le 16/07/2015 07:34, Brett Cannon a écrit : > > I have met people at PyCon > numerous times who have viewed at least python-dev as at minimum cold > and possibly hostile to people, and that's simply not the kind of > environment I would like to foster. For the record, the last time someone said something like that, it was on the PSF-members ML. When it was questioned by several people, I think nobody gave any example or fact to back that opinion. Regards Antoine. ___ python-committers mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Re: [python-committers] More explicit Code of Conduct for the issue tracker & core mailing lists?
On 16 July 2015 at 14:16, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 12:29:52PM +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote: > [...] >> I think their guidelines align pretty well with the way we try to run >> the CPython issue tracker and the core mailing lists, but we don't >> currently spell out those expectations for newcomers (or potential >> newcomers) as clearly as they have. >> >> Would folks mind if I drafted a CPython Code of Conduct inspired by >> their example, and proposed it for inclusion in the Developer's Guide? > > Is there an actual social problem you are trying to solve here, or have > you just run out of things to do? :-) There are some practical aspects I'd like to address in a more easily referenced form. That would primarily be about clarifying ways of handle certain recurring confrontational tasks respectfully: * redirecting requests for help on either python-dev or python-ideas to Stack Overflow or python-list * redirecting threads for insufficiently fleshed out suggestions from python-dev to python-ideas * suggesting that particular ideas may be better suited to a third party package or a personal utility module * pointing out when an idea has already been considered (and rejected) in the past * when raising concerns about an already landed change, being clear on the difference between asking for the change to be reverted vs asking for clarification or further improvement That last one is actually an area where I *dis*agree with the FreeBSD guidelines - I see asking for someone to revert a change as a big deal, as it means we're laying claim to a non-trivial amount of their time. A non-urgent request for clarification is a different story, but I also see us occasionally repeating a pattern where long before the person that actually made a change has a chance to respond to a thread, there'll be half a dozen or more people jumping in saying "Yeah, I want an answer too!". Given the global nature of the lists, I think we should be giving folks *at least* 24 hours to reply to a question before assuming they're not going to respond, and given that only some of us get to count reading and replying to python-dev threads as work time, a few days leeway would be better (perhaps even a week to account for folks that are busy with other things during the week and mostly contribute on weekends). Those of us that *do* get paid for this also need to try to remember to account for that asymmetry in available time for participation. The general Python CoC is good as far as it goes, but actually putting openness, respect and kindness into practice on a public international mailing list that now mixes paid contributors with volunteers is a genuinely hard task that could likely benefit from a few pragmatic tips :) Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | [email protected] | Brisbane, Australia ___ python-committers mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Re: [python-committers] More explicit Code of Conduct for the issue tracker & core mailing lists?
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 10:08 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > That last one is actually an area where I *dis*agree with the FreeBSD > guidelines - I see asking for someone to revert a change as a big > deal, as it means we're laying claim to a non-trivial amount of their > time. A non-urgent request for clarification is a different story, but > I also see us occasionally repeating a pattern where long before the > person that actually made a change has a chance to respond to a > thread, there'll be half a dozen or more people jumping in saying > "Yeah, I want an answer too!". I have seen a couple of these too. Sometimes it is a pile on, but other times it is a very reasonable question to python-dev that goes completely unanswered. Those cases (which are admittedly few) are unfortunate b/c if one person has a question about a commit, then others probably to do. When the question goes unanswered, then we miss out on learning something. For example, I remember a case from a few months ago where someone (don't remember who off the top of my head) made a micro-optimization and there were post-commit questions about it. As far as I can tell, the question went unanswered and I sincerely was curious what the rationale for the change was. I felt like there was something we all could have learned from the potential discussion around the question that was asked. > Given the global nature of the lists, I think we should be giving > folks *at least* 24 hours to reply to a question before assuming > they're not going to respond, and given that only some of us get to > count reading and replying to python-dev threads as work time, a few > days leeway would be better (perhaps even a week to account for folks > that are busy with other things during the week and mostly contribute > on weekends). Those of us that *do* get paid for this also need to try > to remember to account for that asymmetry in available time for > participation. To me this depends on why the change is being questioned. If there is a question about why a change was made or a minor bug was found in post-commit review*, then I agree it can wait a few days. On the other hand, if someone commits a change that turns all the build-bots red and doesn't respond for several hours, then I would think that is fair game to revert. So, I do think reverting changes is a very reasonable course of action at times. It should just be used judiciously. -- Meador * Ideally these kinds of things would be caught in pre-commit review, but I understand that it is not always practical to expect that everyone gets a chance for pre-commit review for every change or that every bug is caught in pre-commit review. ___ python-committers mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
