[arch-dev-public] Changes to the Code of Conduct
Dear all, Jonas and I have been working on changes to our Code of Conduct, which are represented in the following merge request: https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/service-agreements/-/merge_requests/1... While most changes are based on e.g. merging sections or moving topics to separate documents to make the text more concise and allow easier changes in the future, there are also a few changes and omissions explained in more detail in the respective commits of the merge request. Best, David -- https://sleepmap.de
On 13/7/21 11:42 pm, David Runge via arch-dev-public wrote:
Dear all,
Jonas and I have been working on changes to our Code of Conduct, which are represented in the following merge request:
https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/service-agreements/-/merge_requests/1...
While most changes are based on e.g. merging sections or moving topics to separate documents to make the text more concise and allow easier changes in the future, there are also a few changes and omissions explained in more detail in the respective commits of the merge request.
Hi David, Thanks for taking the lead on this. It is important our Code of Conduct is up to standard. I just read the document as it stands after your proposed changes. My conclusion was it is too long, often explained points in too much detail, and was too long! Compare with Codes of Conduct from other distros. Debian: https://www.debian.org/code_of_conduct Gentoo: https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Council/Code_of_conduct Fedora: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ Suse: https://suse.com/betaprogram/codeofconduct/ I opened all those, and read the lot in about the same time as reading the current draft of the Arch Code of Conduct. Note the short and effective sentences. Fedora is a variant of the Contributor Covenant, also used by the Linux kernel. The Ubuntu code of Conduct is rather long like ours. But appears less of a community CoC. I highly recommend taking a scalpel to the current text. I'm happy to take a pass if you would like my suggestions in more solid format. Allan
On 2021-07-14 13:58:07 (+1000), Allan McRae via arch-dev-public wrote:
I just read the document as it stands after your proposed changes. My conclusion was it is too long, often explained points in too much detail, and was too long!
I agree. The current work focusses mainly on splitting out technical guidelines (while still referencing them), as those - apart from containing links to outside resources - are also more likely to change more often and should not be part of the Terms of Service. I realize, that the following was not mentioned in my first mail: Without the minimum set of above changes we can not release the Terms of Service as is. This is because the ToS are a set of legal documents, that once released, can only be changed with prior notice of about a month. With inline references to other documents that are not explicitly marked as "outside of the ToS" and which may change at arbitrary points in time, this is of course not possible.
Compare with Codes of Conduct from other distros.
Debian: https://www.debian.org/code_of_conduct Gentoo: https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Council/Code_of_conduct Fedora: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ Suse: https://suse.com/betaprogram/codeofconduct/
Some of them (but also others) are actually referenced in the ticket, that belongs to the merge request. I agree that ours is still too specific (and therefore also too long).
I highly recommend taking a scalpel to the current text. I'm happy to take a pass if you would like my suggestions in more solid format.
That would be very awesome, thank you! Preferably I would like to do further changes to the CoC (to improve wording and conciseness) in a follow-up MR though, as the diff will otherwise become a bit extreme in the current one. Best, David -- https://sleepmap.de
On 2021-07-14 12:00, David Runge via arch-dev-public wrote:
On 2021-07-14 13:58:07 (+1000), Allan McRae via arch-dev-public wrote:
I highly recommend taking a scalpel to the current text. I'm happy to take a pass if you would like my suggestions in more solid format.
That would be very awesome, thank you!
I fully agree that the Code of Conduct could be shortened much further: the current merge request is mostly aimed at getting the structure of the document into a better shape by outsourcing or removing non-essential parts, the wording is left mostly unchanged. Any effort to make it more concise is much appreciated indeed! Cheers, Jonas
On 14/7/21 8:41 pm, Jonas Witschel via arch-dev-public wrote:
On 2021-07-14 12:00, David Runge via arch-dev-public wrote:
On 2021-07-14 13:58:07 (+1000), Allan McRae via arch-dev-public wrote:
I highly recommend taking a scalpel to the current text. I'm happy to take a pass if you would like my suggestions in more solid format.
That would be very awesome, thank you!
I fully agree that the Code of Conduct could be shortened much further: the current merge request is mostly aimed at getting the structure of the document into a better shape by outsourcing or removing non-essential parts, the wording is left mostly unchanged. Any effort to make it more concise is much appreciated indeed!
And you can see my draft of a much more simple Code of Conduct here: https://gitlab.archlinux.org/allan/service-agreements/-/blob/coc/code-of-con... I believe it still covers everything in the previous version while being only ~12% of the length. Allan
On 21-07-16 10:10, Allan McRae via arch-dev-public wrote:
And you can see my draft of a much more simple Code of Conduct here:
https://gitlab.archlinux.org/allan/service-agreements/-/blob/coc/code-of-con...
I believe it still covers everything in the previous version while being only ~12% of the length.
Allan
That's a great start! Thanks for taking the time to simplify this agreement. -- George Rawlinson
participants (4)
-
Allan McRae
-
David Runge
-
George Rawlinson
-
Jonas Witschel