Em setembro 4, 2021 9:36 Allan McRae via arch-dev-public escreveu:
We appear to be reaching the point where a formal code of conduct will be officially adopted.
Hmm, it was a long time ago. It's pointed out on all the support channels.
What is that I hear you say? We have had a Code of Conduct for a long time? And you are incorrect.
Not really.
The history of the Code of Conduct is poorly documented. But it started out as a forum guidelines written by one of the forum admins. As far as I can ascertain, this document had no input from the project leadership. At some stage this was moved to the wiki and became titled as a Code of Conduct as more general points were added to cover aspects of Arch beyond the forums.
As far as I know both Aaron, which was the leader when the CoC was introduced, and Levente, not only knew about the CoC, but were fine with it.
At no point has this code of conduct ever been formally adopted by the distribution. In fact, our distribution has no constitution detailing what the purpose of this distribution is and how it will be governed. So there is no formal process for officially adopting a Code of Conduct.
The CoC was adopted by all the support channels.
Why does this matter now? The Code of Conduct is moving from being a random wiki page, to a "binding" document that users must agree to in order to access our services. Before this can happen, Arch Linux needs to adopt a formal governance structure in order to approve such a binding change.
Why it needs "formal governance"?
Take a look at other distributions governance structures and constitutions: https://www.debian.org/devel/constitution https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/council/
Both Debian and Fedora have thousands of contributors, we have about a hundred formal staff, plus many volunteers that help on the support channels. I'm not saying we shouldn't have formal documents (we're headed that way), just saying I don't think we need a constitution, yet.
I formally object to adopting a formal Code of Conduct until we have a clear governance structure who can develop the policies and procedures that are formally needed to enforce a Code of Conduct. Currently the Code of Conduct states the Project Leader is responsible for enforcement, although that is not listed as one of their duties as approved when developing the Project Leader election procedure: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/DeveloperWiki:Project_Leader This once again demonstrate the lack of formal governance within the distribution. We can not proceed with a Code of Conduct (or the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy), until a formal governance structure and procedures are developed to approve such documents.
Again with the assertion that we cannot proceed without governance. The "why" is missing. Don't get me wrong, I think we will inevitably have some sort of council. But I don't see the need for one *right now*. Nor do I think we should block everything until we do.
Again, until such a governance structure has been developed, I formally object to the official adoption of the Code of Conduct.
Again, it was adopted for a long time now. Regards, Giancarlo Razzolini