[arch-dev-public] RFC Final Comment Period: Adoption of a distribution-wide Code of Conduct

Allan McRae allan at archlinux.org
Fri Oct 8 11:40:24 UTC 2021

On 8/10/21 9:31 pm, Morten Linderud via arch-dev-public wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 08, 2021 at 07:24:58PM +1000, Allan McRae via arch-dev-public wrote:
>> On 8/10/21 6:01 pm, David Runge wrote:
>>> Starting a discussion about the length and form of the Code of Conduct
>>> *after* not interacting with the own changes to the Code of Conduct that
>>> would fix it, *after* not interacting with the RFC that wants to
>>> establish the CoC distribution-wide during its comment period and also
>>> *after* not interacting with the changes that were done last to the CoC
>>> (which in fact you gave the initial idea for and were informed about its
>>> progress multiple times) by Jonas and I, but instead complained about
>>> *after the fact*, to me, quite frankly at this point feels nothing short
>>> of condescending and disrespectful.
>> The RFC does not give the option of an edited version of the Code of
>> Conduct being adopted.  The RFC states that the Code of Conduct "is
>> hereby officially adopted in its current form".  Hence the RFC is about
>> adopting the *current* version of the Code of Conduct, which I object to.
> I'm not sure why you stopped reading after that part. The next section specifies
> that it's a living document and changes can be merged going forward.
>     "The Code of Conduct is a living document that may change over time. Changes
>     are applied by merge request towards the `Service Agreements repository
>     <https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/service-agreements/>`_. Any
>     contributions follow the repository's contribution guidelines."
> Which should satisfy your current problem with the document as-is. We can amend
> and fix it at a later point regardless. Your current issues with the document
> isn't a good enough reason to block this process, and we can work it out at a
> later point.

That would apply if I thought the current version was good enough for
formal adoption.  However, I think the current version is unacceptable.


More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list