From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: poffice@blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp Delivered-To: poffice@blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp Received: from kankan.nagaokaut.ac.jp (smtp.nagaokaut.ac.jp [133.44.2.24]) by blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 990B019E0043 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 01:25:09 +0900 (JST) Received: from voscc.nagaokaut.ac.jp (voscc.nagaokaut.ac.jp [133.44.1.100]) by kankan.nagaokaut.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F71BB5D85A for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 01:59:07 +0900 (JST) Received: from neon.ruby-lang.org (neon.ruby-lang.org [221.186.184.75]) by voscc.nagaokaut.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 335C518CC7D1 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 01:59:07 +0900 (JST) Received: from [221.186.184.76] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by neon.ruby-lang.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFA091204D1; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 01:59:04 +0900 (JST) X-Original-To: ruby-core@ruby-lang.org Delivered-To: ruby-core@ruby-lang.org Received: from o10.shared.sendgrid.net (o10.shared.sendgrid.net [173.193.132.135]) by neon.ruby-lang.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE689120467 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 01:59:01 +0900 (JST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sendgrid.me; h=from:to:references:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:list-id; s=smtpapi; bh=r38ISVr4oeTC0U7QYJ+33Jhkuf4=; b=y/4L/pRDK/lZP5ZZ/+ UZqzd6R+YuELatYk/PwkiXd0CVhz0uEPSBK17/t7R20+SpF+oJZEYhggeVzNxih6 LGYpy1Tw1NTP0ihrsiw5NMlrvZQZOkGJTwSJcwjSURnEUgItycOqxGWBXtTs3Jw+ jaghVroKP31zWQ4lBPqXk+6qs= Received: by filter0514p1mdw1.sendgrid.net with SMTP id filter0514p1mdw1.23149.56A7A5CA37 2016-01-26 16:58:50.505430397 +0000 UTC Received: from herokuapp.com (ec2-54-145-125-246.compute-1.amazonaws.com [54.145.125.246]) by ismtpd0001p1iad1.sendgrid.net (SG) with ESMTP id Dy-CbhW6TqqQ9x_ok-Yazw Tue, 26 Jan 2016 16:58:50.499 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 16:58:50 +0000 From: git@chuckremes.com To: ruby-core@ruby-lang.org Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Redmine-MailingListIntegration-Message-Ids: 48088 X-Redmine-Project: ruby-trunk X-Redmine-Issue-Id: 12004 X-Redmine-Issue-Author: CoralineAda X-Redmine-Issue-Assignee: matz X-Redmine-Sender: cremes X-Mailer: Redmine X-Redmine-Host: bugs.ruby-lang.org X-Redmine-Site: Ruby Issue Tracking System X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All Auto-Submitted: auto-generated X-SG-EID: ync6xU2WACa70kv/Ymy4QrNMhiuLXJG8OTL2vJD1yS69USJcFH5LkJ/3h096z09zU19HNO896WG8tw cw+EmdENoiMHqJpxjJPEsnCDkw5w/6J8MVAa1MlT/dE7wJGzhZfjZKHa5HYCAyf6u4HWBQaFjyKjWX dSegkE8iPf3pRWkgbRV5aIPbF2rFKaDb04YRPOz6k82nyrAXJyYCscjEVw== X-ML-Name: ruby-core X-Mail-Count: 73486 Subject: [ruby-core:73486] [Ruby trunk - Misc #12004] Code of Conduct X-BeenThere: ruby-core@ruby-lang.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: Ruby developers List-Id: Ruby developers List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ruby-core-bounces@ruby-lang.org Sender: "ruby-core" Issue #12004 has been updated by Chuck Remes. In #371, Kurtis Rainbolt-Greene listed several projects that have adopted the CoC and asked if any of the feared downsides of a CoC have arisen. I think we should ask an opposite question. Have any of those projects seen an *increase* in participation? Have any marginalized peoples suddenly joined the community and contributed (via code, bug reports, documentation, etc)? And if there is an increase, is it statistically measurable on an on-going basis or just a one-off? I'm too lazy to do the work to prove this out one way or the other, but then again the burden of proof to adopt a CoC is on its proponents. They should do the work to prove a CoC's value *particularly* since it will create more work for the core team. I'm going to go on a short tangent. I am a long time member of the Zeromq community. Several years ago there was a falling out between two core contributors and one of them ended up leaving the project (to start XS and Nano projects). The arguments and split were handled very well without any CoC in place at all. The core contributor learned quite a bit from that experience. He ended up devising a new process for contributors and community participants. After some evolution, he made a nice post on it and calls it the C4.1 process. See here for details: http://hintjens.com/blog:93 Furthermore, his efforts to grow the community were wildly successful. The community absolutely exploded in the months following the personnel change. Code contributions and bug reports came from a whole group of new people who had never participated before because the guideline (NOT a CoC) lowered the barriers for participation. The community was vibrant before the project fork but afterwards it was vibrant X 10. This community renewal all occurred without a CoC. It could be argued that the Ruby community is already stronger than the zeromq community but it could always be stronger. Perhaps it should look to the C4.1 process as a potential way for improving interest and participation? At minimum, the CoC proponents should *prove* via some metric (community participation, more/better PRs, bug reports, etc) that adopting a CoC will benefit this project. So far it just sounds like more work for Core. ---------------------------------------- Misc #12004: Code of Conduct https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/12004#change-56710 * Author: Coraline Ada Ehmke * Status: Assigned * Priority: Normal * Assignee: Yukihiro Matsumoto ---------------------------------------- I am the creator of the Contributor Covenant, a code of conduct for Open Source projects. At last count there are over 13,000 projects on Github that have adopted it. This past year saw adoption of Contributor Covenant by a lot of very large, very visible projects, including Rails, Github's Atom text editor, Angular JS, bundler, curl, diaspora, discourse, Eclipse, rspec, shoes, and rvm. The bundler team made code of conduct integration an option in the gem creation workflow, putting it on par with license selection. Many open source language communities have already adopted the code of conduct, including Elixir, Mono, the .NET foundation, F#, and Apple's Swift. RubyTogether also adopted a policy to only fund Ruby projects that had a solid code of conduct in place. Right now in the PHP community there is a healthy debate about adopting the Contributor Covenant. Since it came from and has been so widely adopted by the Ruby community at large, I think it's time that we consider adopting it for the core Ruby language as well. Our community prides itself on niceness. What a code of conduct does is define what we mean by nice. It states clearly that we value openness, courtesy, and compassion. That we care about and want contributions from people who may be different from us. That we pledge to respect all contributors regardless of their race, gender, sexual orientation, or other factors. And it makes it clear that we are prepared to follow through on these values with action when and if an incident arises. I'm asking that we join with the larger Ruby community in supporting the adoption of the Contributor Covenant for the Ruby language. I think that this will be an important step forward and will ensure the continued welcoming and supportive environment around Ruby. You can read the full text of the Contributor Covenant at http://contributor-covenant.org/version/1/3/0/ and learn more at http://contributor-covenant.org/. Thanks for your consideration and I look forward to hearing your thoughts. ---Files-------------------------------- Screen Shot 2016-01-22 at 6.45.23 PM.png (595 KB) Ruby_Code_of_Conduct_Numbers.png (119 KB) Ruby_Code_of_Conduct_Discussion.png (143 KB) -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/