On 16 July 2015 at 14:16, Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 12:29:52PM +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote: > [...] >> I think their guidelines align pretty well with the way we try to run >> the CPython issue tracker and the core mailing lists, but we don't >> currently spell out those expectations for newcomers (or potential >> newcomers) as clearly as they have. >> >> Would folks mind if I drafted a CPython Code of Conduct inspired by >> their example, and proposed it for inclusion in the Developer's Guide? > > Is there an actual social problem you are trying to solve here, or have > you just run out of things to do? :-)
There are some practical aspects I'd like to address in a more easily referenced form. That would primarily be about clarifying ways of handle certain recurring confrontational tasks respectfully: * redirecting requests for help on either python-dev or python-ideas to Stack Overflow or python-list * redirecting threads for insufficiently fleshed out suggestions from python-dev to python-ideas * suggesting that particular ideas may be better suited to a third party package or a personal utility module * pointing out when an idea has already been considered (and rejected) in the past * when raising concerns about an already landed change, being clear on the difference between asking for the change to be reverted vs asking for clarification or further improvement That last one is actually an area where I *dis*agree with the FreeBSD guidelines - I see asking for someone to revert a change as a big deal, as it means we're laying claim to a non-trivial amount of their time. A non-urgent request for clarification is a different story, but I also see us occasionally repeating a pattern where long before the person that actually made a change has a chance to respond to a thread, there'll be half a dozen or more people jumping in saying "Yeah, I want an answer too!". Given the global nature of the lists, I think we should be giving folks *at least* 24 hours to reply to a question before assuming they're not going to respond, and given that only some of us get to count reading and replying to python-dev threads as work time, a few days leeway would be better (perhaps even a week to account for folks that are busy with other things during the week and mostly contribute on weekends). Those of us that *do* get paid for this also need to try to remember to account for that asymmetry in available time for participation. The general Python CoC is good as far as it goes, but actually putting openness, respect and kindness into practice on a public international mailing list that now mixes paid contributors with volunteers is a genuinely hard task that could likely benefit from a few pragmatic tips :) Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ python-committers mailing list python-committers@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
