> On 13 January 2016 at 03:10, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> The "disparaging remarks" part of this could easily be taken to forbid >> technical criticism of any sort, eg "this patch is bad because X,Y, >> and Z", even when X,Y, and Z are perfectly neutral technical points. >> "Of any kind" doesn't improve that either. I'm on board with the >> "personal attacks" part. Maybe "disparaging personal remarks" would be >> better?
> IME attacks (even if they are purely technical) on one's code can be as > hurtful and equally as likely to result in alienation as personal attacks. > I'm not sure how you would word it but just concentrating on personal attacks > leaves open the sort of bullying that has been seen in other projects. > Perhaps you could add something about valuing contributions from and making > allowances for those with less expertise. > I know that's sort-of implied by the "any person who is willing to > contribute" phrase but I would say that being explicit about it is more > likely to encourage non-contributors to contribute than what's been arrived > at so far. > Geoff I agree it's hard to even talk about just technical without hurting someone's feelings, but I really don't think there is much we can do about that. Except linking to a separate document about how to get newbie help. I think that kind of thing would be better handled by mentoring sessions (like a big developer taking you under their wings) than trying to deal with that sensitivity in a Coc. In fact people would take advantage of the situation if you say things like "less expertise", because then they'd expect preferential treatment because they don't know C and be constantly badgering everybody for help. Thanks, Regina -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
