subject:"\[oi\-dev\] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct"

On 07/26/16 12:47 AM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:
> If I can explain another/a last time: there is no censorship as you were 
> asked to put your draft alongside the original proposal, kept for reference.
> There will be one final Code of Conduct but there can be several strains to 
> serve as basis, as you were unhappy with Adam and Michael's formulation.

This is not true, because there is only one on the site because you are
afraid to have another on site.

> In this frame we have an open process were different options can be analyzed.

Yet there is the only one option is on site and liked to Wiki..

> By modifying the document in-place you deny people the right to formulate a 
> proposal: 

And Xenol(Adam) modified document again on site and in-place today and
you don't react..

> this type of censorship is exactly what you stand against, this seems a bit 
> counter-intuitive on your part.

Censorship has many forms, like supporting creation of pages by one and
forbidding and gagging another.

And by the way I just received another threatening e-mail from Xenol,
threatening to cut me off from the mailing list.

So that is how things will be doing form now on folks:
if you are against fascist texts made by makruger, xenol will gag you
and send threats.
No escape form trolling, because it is systematically supported.

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-25 Thread Aurélien Larcher



À lun. juil. 25 21:41:32 2016 GMT+0100, Nikola M a écrit :
> On 07/25/16 12:01 PM, Volker A. Brandt wrote:
> > Dear Nikola!
> >
> >
> >> I just received threats from Adam in the form of "warning",
> > [...]
> >
> >> On personal level, it hurts more to recognize that long-standing, 
> >> importand and
> >> capable guy like Adam, makes so much of mistakes and misuse, the minute it 
> >> gets
> >> to real community dealings.
> > The same thing could be said about you.  
> 
> Well, am not the one who misuse power. and it surely can not be said. I
> am not a fascist.

If I can explain another/a last time: there is no censorship as you were asked 
to put your draft alongside the original proposal, kept for reference.
There will be one final Code of Conduct but there can be several strains to 
serve as basis, as you were unhappy with Adam and Michael's formulation.
In this frame we have an open process were different options can be analyzed.
By modifying the document in-place you deny people the right to formulate a 
proposal: this type of censorship is exactly what you stand against, this seems 
a bit counter-intuitive on your part.

> 
> > Please relax, calm down, and
> > do some other things for a few days.  Nobody wants to forbid you from
> > stating your opinion, but the way you do it, and the way you attack
> > people personally, 
> 
> You say untrue things.
> I all the time talk about document and problems in it.
> 
> And there is myriad of trolling answers or those who reply +1 -1 with
> out any clue.
> 
> > is very exhausting.
> 
> Yes and having fascist manifesto and misuse in the document on OI site
> is not a problem?
> 
> > Just imagine what someone else might feel when he reads your emails
> > describing him *before* you send it.  Words like "dumb", "misuse",
> > and "fascist" are really not appropriate in this discussion.
> 
> It truly is.
> 
> > From reading this list, on IRC, and looking at commits, I know that you
> > are a smart and motivated long-time contributur to OI.  Please listen to
> > the rest of us when we ask you to relax a bit.
> 
> Yes, let's relax things a bit.
> 
> I proposed to putt that horrifying thing off the OI site, but no fascist
> manifesto is there by power.
> I also edited the site TWICE , trying to explain the differences
> and i am not going to do anymore it is enough it was reverted twice.

It was reverted to keep the original proposal for reference so that people can 
understand and reflect on the differences, not for the sake of censorship.
If we had removed you proposal and  your credentials from the begining this 
would have been a fault but this is not what happened.

The issue at hand here is your inability to accept different a point of view by 
actively modifying/removing content.

To sum up:
- the Code of Conduct was discussed and the idea accepted by all active 
developers
- the draft seems to find a positive echo in the community and was improved 
based on given feedback,
- while you raised valid points, your vendetta makes them completely inaudible,
- even less when you compare what is informally 'a core team'', i.e.  main 
contributors with administrator role in the project, to fascists.

I think it is time to wrap it up:
- if you are  able to formulate amendements to the current draft in a concise 
fashion then it is all the better,
- but if you get stuck with antagonizing behaviour, and provided that most 
people otherwise responded in a positive manner, the process will move forward 
not matter what.

Contributing new content on your CPE page and asking for review is encouraged.
However, actively modifying/removing content from other contributions will be 
considered as a disruption.

All the best,

Aurélien 


> 
> 
> 
> ___
> oi-dev mailing list
> oi-dev@openindiana.org
> http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
>

-- 
Thanks for sailing Jolla :)
___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

On 07/25/16 12:01 PM, Volker A. Brandt wrote:
> Dear Nikola!
>
>
>> I just received threats from Adam in the form of "warning",
> [...]
>
>> On personal level, it hurts more to recognize that long-standing, importand 
>> and
>> capable guy like Adam, makes so much of mistakes and misuse, the minute it 
>> gets
>> to real community dealings.
> The same thing could be said about you.  

Well, am not the one who misuse power. and it surely can not be said. I
am not a fascist.

> Please relax, calm down, and
> do some other things for a few days.  Nobody wants to forbid you from
> stating your opinion, but the way you do it, and the way you attack
> people personally, 

You say untrue things.
I all the time talk about document and problems in it.

And there is myriad of trolling answers or those who reply +1 -1 with
out any clue.

> is very exhausting.

Yes and having fascist manifesto and misuse in the document on OI site
is not a problem?

> Just imagine what someone else might feel when he reads your emails
> describing him *before* you send it.  Words like "dumb", "misuse",
> and "fascist" are really not appropriate in this discussion.

It truly is.

> From reading this list, on IRC, and looking at commits, I know that you
> are a smart and motivated long-time contributur to OI.  Please listen to
> the rest of us when we ask you to relax a bit.

Yes, let's relax things a bit.

I proposed to putt that horrifying thing off the OI site, but no fascist
manifesto is there by power.
I also edited the site TWICE , trying to explain the differences
and i am not going to do anymore it is enough it was reverted twice.

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

On 07/25/16 02:00 PM, Adam Števko wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I restored the copy on different wiki subpage, so people are able to
> see it: http://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/Code+of+Conduct+proposals
>

Instead of reading this fascist BS, you can visit:
http://wiki.openindiana.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=31391953

(Don't worry , xenol probably won't "warn" or threaten you by reading it,
that I couldn't say if you edit he's fascist document.)

Adam, you again misused your web site access to point to the fascist
manifesto.

It's a progress, you don't threat anymore for editing your writing, you
just use a power, like a real dictator to confuse and make people feel
stupid.

If anyone can explain, what this fascist and imprecisely misusing and
misleading thing is this:
If anyone who "likes" this stupidity of writing, can confirm waht
exactly he/she likes in this for raping and segregating WITHOUT ANY
RULES, all the people for personal likings, he/she can say that now
after reading this:

>
> What will not be tolerated:
>
>   * Discrimination based on gender, race, nationality, sexuality,
> religion, age or physical disability.
>   * Open hostility, and or abusive language.
>   * Repeated complaining (rehashing) of closed (decided) issues.
>   * Participants who disrupt the collaborative space, or participate
> in a pattern of behavior which could be considered harassment.
>   * Filibustering – (replying with negative or opposing viewpoints to
> every post in a mailing list thread).
>

It is precisely written to facilitate trolling and misuse.

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-25 Thread Adam Števko

Hello,

I restored the copy on different wiki subpage, so people are able to see it: 
http://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/Code+of+Conduct+proposals 


Cheers,
Adam

> On Jul 24, 2016, at 8:59 PM, Adam Števko  wrote:
> 
> Hello everybody,
> 
> I added draft of proposed CoC to wiki here: 
> http://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/Code+of+Conduct+proposals
> 
> I modified the Wiki entry to contain both versions.
> 
> Modified version of initial CoC text contains following changes:
> 
> - added to "Core principles and expectations:” part:
> 
> • Always seek to maintain a welcoming environment for new contributors.
>   • Welcome new people to the project and guide them in their 
> contributions.
>   • Give them the time you were given when you first joined the community.
>   • And if you weren't given enough time please set a new example for 
> others to live by.
> • Be open and transparent so others can participate on an equal footing and 
> contribute to the project in their own way.
>   • Everyone has something to contribute.
> 
> - added to “What will not be tolerated:” part:
> 
> Discrimination based on gender, race, nationality, sexuality, religion, age 
> or physical disability.
> 
> - “Reporting violations” part was changed:
>   • Violations of the CoC should be reported to the distribution 
> maintainers via ab...@openindiana.org.
>   • Neither reporters nor reported persons will, or should be, 
> made public.
>   • Upon receipt of a problem report, the distribution maintainers will 
> investigate the issue and determine whether it warrants further action. Any 
> further action will be proportional to the severity of the problem.
> 
> Changed things are based on former OpenSolaris Code of Conduct and 
> solicitations from the OpenIndiana community.
> 
> I hope that people are OK with these changes. I also expect this to be the 
> final draft unless some comments appear.
> 
> Cheers,
> Adam
> 
>> On Jul 24, 2016, at 5:56 PM, Aurélien Larcher  
>> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Le 24 juil. 2016 17:17, Nikola M  a écrit :
>>> 
>>> On 07/24/16 05:10 PM, Nikola M wrote:
 As long it is there site is under occupation from that troll document.
>>> 
>>> And I won't try to change it anymore, since Aurelien objected and want
>>> it unchanged for whatever reason it is...
>>> Wanting to have document unchanged is obvious obstacle in community
>>> process, but hey, you have it..
>>> 
>> 
>> I just object to change without consultation of authors. :)
>> 
>> Adam, would you mind adding at least a référence to the WIP on the wiki and 
>> a line of context  to specify that the proposed document is only a basis and 
>> subject to improvement and acceptance by the community ?
>> 
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> oi-dev mailing list
>>> oi-dev@openindiana.org
>>> http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
>> ___
>> oi-dev mailing list
>> oi-dev@openindiana.org
>> http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-25 Thread Volker A. Brandt

Dear Nikola!


> I just received threats from Adam in the form of "warning",
[...]

> On personal level, it hurts more to recognize that long-standing, importand 
> and
> capable guy like Adam, makes so much of mistakes and misuse, the minute it 
> gets
> to real community dealings.

The same thing could be said about you.  Please relax, calm down, and
do some other things for a few days.  Nobody wants to forbid you from
stating your opinion, but the way you do it, and the way you attack
people personally, is very exhausting.

Just imagine what someone else might feel when he reads your emails
describing him *before* you send it.  Words like "dumb", "misuse",
and "fascist" are really not appropriate in this discussion.

>From reading this list, on IRC, and looking at commits, I know that you
are a smart and motivated long-time contributur to OI.  Please listen to
the rest of us when we ask you to relax a bit.


Thanks -- Volker A. Brandt
-- 

Volker A. Brandt   Consulting and Support for Oracle Solaris
Brandt & Brandt Computer GmbH   WWW: http://www.bb-c.de/
Am Wiesenpfad 6, 53340 Meckenheim, GERMANYEmail: v...@bb-c.de
Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Bonn, HRB 10513  Schuhgröße: 46
Geschäftsführer: Rainer J.H. Brandt und Volker A. Brandt

"When logic and proportion have fallen sloppy dead"

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

On 07/18/16 11:35 PM, Adam Števko wrote:
> Hello,

I just received threats from Adam in the form of "warning",
where he threatens me by forbidding contribution, limiting and deleting
accounts and showing in general total not understanding how Wiki works
and that no one seeks approval to write articles if having account.

Over this incident I can only realize that Adam is not at all material
for a leader in this community, for not having community integration
capabilities and that having a position of managing infrastructure of OI
he is starting to misuse he's powers trying to mandate things.

On personal level, it hurts more to recognize that long-standing,
importand and capable guy like Adam, makes so much of mistakes and
misuse, the minute it gets to real community dealings. Since this test
have not been passed without aggressive action, I fully question ability
of doing public work.
 


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

On 07/25/16 10:09 AM, Bart Coddens wrote:
> Please Nikola,
>
> Take your bike out and go for a ride in the countryside.
> This everlasting tirade/rant does not help the community or yourself.
> Just my 2c,

This mesage of yours is off-topic and presents personal trolling.

Ine does not need CPE/CoC to act upon trolling , it is when you take out
of the topic and personally attack people, that is Btw included in
proposed edited text under
"Participate while on topic, with personal remarks being not on topic at
all times.".

If you have something to add on topic, regarding text and what and why
you think should be there,
you can contribute by being on-topic. (Just saying "yes" or "no" simply
does not count for intelligent people.

And yes, I have a bike and i ride, yet that is not the topic.

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

On 07/24/16 08:59 PM, Adam Števko wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> I added draft of proposed CoC to wiki here: 
> http://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/Code+of+Conduct+proposals

Firstly, there are no "code of conducts" there is one document (that
can't be even make active any time soon, but whatever).
Second, xenol have been changing article name that already includes it's
name and reference to it's calling it already.

> I modified the Wiki entry to contain both versions.

That is not good behaviour . If you have so different ideas (that
includes fascist dictatorship), you can make a new one.

Plus it is one document to be working on, not multiple.
I explained it on wiki changes comments.

> Modified version of initial CoC text contains following changes:
>
> - added to "Core principles and expectations:” part:
>
> • Always seek to maintain a welcoming environment for new contributors.
>   • Welcome new people to the project and guide them in their 
> contributions.
>   • Give them the time you were given when you first joined the community.

This part is rephrased and included in the text in a shorter way. See
wiki page logs(history).

>   • And if you weren't given enough time please set a new example for 
> others to live by.

This can be part of another 'bona fide' document again if having enough
talent to put it on paper.
it again works around 'time' resource where it could be careful not to
require much of a people in the start, their interests will follow them
further in.

> • Be open and transparent so others can participate on an equal footing and 
> contribute to the project in their own way.
>   • Everyone has something to contribute.

This already exists in text , also redacted to be shorted and more
easily readable.
But I included all it's points.
My redaction does not repeat "We we" but puts verb as action in the
beginning of the sentences, that seems more reasonable to me.

> - added to “What will not be tolerated:” part:
>
> Discrimination based on gender, race, nationality, sexuality, religion, age 
> or physical disability.

Thi is horrible and is already covered in "No personal witch hunt, based
on anything toward a person(s)."
where "anything" encompass all mentioned things already.

Listing some of them would provde endless calls to add more one the list
and also discussing on those terms as topics can provide boisterously
off-topic. So better say, no personal things, period.

> - “Reporting violations” part was changed:
>   • Violations of the CoC should be reported to the distribution 
> maintainers via ab...@openindiana.org.

This mail address can't be used for other purposes because historically
it is used for reporting SPAM form mail to mail server administrators.
Reusing it for something else can give save heaven to trolls and disrupt
SPAM reporting process.

There is no need to have "violations" and also there is no need to have
centralized place or a guy that mandates everything, like put here.

There are no additional right nor reason to give to "distribution
maintainers", because all that sh* job of dealing woth the community in
general distracts of more important work.

Also one persons or few of them can't mandate everything within
community, so no reason to centralize, plus it is not good thing to
"mandate all communication channels" in one place, that is plainly wrong
and can stop people forming projects and groups advancing parts, and
that is not usable as a result.

>   • Neither reporters nor reported persons will, or should be, 
> made public.

This is clearly wrong. Perons need to have "guts" to come in public.
Inducing secrecy in operating things is disastrous to open projects.
If one want to take part in open project, one should act in open giving
ability to other to contribute.
No private witch hunts, as already stated.
Witch-hunting  is very bad and inducing it in this way, in secret is
very bad and can only help trolls.

>   • Upon receipt of a problem report, 

There is NO problem(s) regarding CPE (CoC).
Because there ar no "policing officers" everything can be put to the
wide community to work things out, before even reaching any need for
action, there are numerous ways of modifying and educating (plus givint
the time, remember) before doing something aggressive like proposed here.

> the distribution maintainers will investigate the issue and determine whether 
> it warrants further action. Any further action will be proportional to the 
> severity of the problem.

No. There are no "distribution maintainers".
There are some roles, workings, voluntary obligations and active people
within community.

There can not be  "elite" that mandates, without registered active
members and body made out of it.

So Adam, whatever you are doing with this document here, it CAN not give
yourself more power, there could be active community membership forming
and it can take some time,
but you can't mandate anything in the community, by the force of

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-25 Thread Bart Coddens

Please Nikola,

Take your bike out and go for a ride in the countryside.
This everlasting tirade/rant does not help the community or yourself.
Just my 2c,

Bart

2016-07-25 10:05 GMT+02:00 Nikola M :

> On 07/24/16 05:40 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:
> > It is only democratic to pull the plug out of that page, showing that
> > unfunished undemocratic documents like that should not have democratic
> > support at all, promoting autoritarian rula and forcing it.
> >
> > Other then that, democratic way could be having links on that page
> > pointing to Wiki so people can contribute there, but I choosed to have
> > both of them presented concurrently, old useless one and newer rewriting
> > of it.
> > If work occurs on the Wiki then it is natural to point to it.
>
> But it is not natural to have stale and bad  old version of it on site
> for no reason.
>
> Plus xenol yesterday changed on-Wiki article name, that is not done on
> existing articles.
> Also xenol received reccomendations on how to edit Wiki in a right way.
>
> Only problem with it is that those "not to be tolerated" parts of
> proposal are idiotic
> and can't be glued into document, for not being precise and pushing
> community into one-man slavery.
>
> >
> >>
> >> So xenol does not have right to PUT it on the site unilaterally.
> >>
> >> And I have ALL right to change and rephrase and contribute improved
> >> version as I did on wiki.
> > You have the right to setup a workspace but modifying website content is
> subject to review.
>
> Great, xenol modified website without public review. Deal with it first.
>
> >
> >> Plus I have rights on site to change documents, so why not I use them to
> >> change?
> > Because the rule on the website is: do not modify existing content
> without acknowledgement and review.
>
> It also goes for NEW documents putting on site, or you have choosen to
> turn blind eye to mandating things and protecting bad things on site,
> but to forbid changes.
>
> I agree site is not a wiki, like I already said, but it is only obvious
> you are not using your own rules like you describe.
>
> >
> >> Xenol used it's right to change, by putting it, I don't see the
> >> difference here.
> > Adam created new content, you modified existing content.
>
> And that is great to do.
>
> Ok, then On Wiki, I created the content and he is modifyoing existing
> content.
>
> I don't thing people should be forbidden to modify existing content.
>
> >> People tend to even say things without even looking,
> >> and it is obvious that pushing document on the site is avoiding any
> >> procedure and community effort and that is bad behaviour that tend to
> >> spread.
> >> As long it is there site is under occupation from that troll document.
> >>
> >> You can of course do whatever you want, it's always your free choice.
> > Do you consider that the group of active developers steering the project
> misbehave by proposing a form of organisation to help OpenIndiana move
> forward?
>
> Of course they do. Plus they propose that trolling is the norm in this
> community, obviously facilitated by makruger idea of ruling.
>
> I say everyone do what knows best that proposed document is clearly full
> of logical and inhumane intentional mistakes that are to destroy this
> community in the long run.
>
> Just take alook at the actual changes and refer on them and be on topic.
>
> > The need of a Code of Conduct was discussed within the group, ideas
> emerged and are thus proposed to the community.
> > Sounds pretty reasonable to me. :)
>
> No it is never discussed before in open, before making this topic,
> anywhere, not even on IRC.
>
> If it is done in secrecy, that is grouse misbehaviour.
> As I see there is no comunity but xenol pushing it on site and some
> trolling content in it.
>
>
> ___
> oi-dev mailing list
> oi-dev@openindiana.org
> http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
>
___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

On 07/24/16 05:40 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:
> It is only democratic to pull the plug out of that page, showing that
> unfunished undemocratic documents like that should not have democratic
> support at all, promoting autoritarian rula and forcing it.
>
> Other then that, democratic way could be having links on that page
> pointing to Wiki so people can contribute there, but I choosed to have
> both of them presented concurrently, old useless one and newer rewriting
> of it.
> If work occurs on the Wiki then it is natural to point to it.

But it is not natural to have stale and bad  old version of it on site
for no reason.

Plus xenol yesterday changed on-Wiki article name, that is not done on
existing articles.
Also xenol received reccomendations on how to edit Wiki in a right way.

Only problem with it is that those "not to be tolerated" parts of
proposal are idiotic
and can't be glued into document, for not being precise and pushing
community into one-man slavery.

>
>>
>> So xenol does not have right to PUT it on the site unilaterally.
>>
>> And I have ALL right to change and rephrase and contribute improved
>> version as I did on wiki.
> You have the right to setup a workspace but modifying website content is 
> subject to review.

Great, xenol modified website without public review. Deal with it first.

>
>> Plus I have rights on site to change documents, so why not I use them to
>> change?
> Because the rule on the website is: do not modify existing content without 
> acknowledgement and review.

It also goes for NEW documents putting on site, or you have choosen to
turn blind eye to mandating things and protecting bad things on site,
but to forbid changes.

I agree site is not a wiki, like I already said, but it is only obvious
you are not using your own rules like you describe.

>
>> Xenol used it's right to change, by putting it, I don't see the
>> difference here.
> Adam created new content, you modified existing content. 

And that is great to do.

Ok, then On Wiki, I created the content and he is modifyoing existing
content.

I don't thing people should be forbidden to modify existing content.

>> People tend to even say things without even looking,
>> and it is obvious that pushing document on the site is avoiding any
>> procedure and community effort and that is bad behaviour that tend to
>> spread.
>> As long it is there site is under occupation from that troll document.
>>
>> You can of course do whatever you want, it's always your free choice.
> Do you consider that the group of active developers steering the project 
> misbehave by proposing a form of organisation to help OpenIndiana move 
> forward?

Of course they do. Plus they propose that trolling is the norm in this
community, obviously facilitated by makruger idea of ruling.

I say everyone do what knows best that proposed document is clearly full
of logical and inhumane intentional mistakes that are to destroy this
community in the long run.

Just take alook at the actual changes and refer on them and be on topic.

> The need of a Code of Conduct was discussed within the group, ideas emerged 
> and are thus proposed to the community.
> Sounds pretty reasonable to me. :)

No it is never discussed before in open, before making this topic,
anywhere, not even on IRC.

If it is done in secrecy, that is grouse misbehaviour.
As I see there is no comunity but xenol pushing it on site and some
trolling content in it.

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

On 07/24/16 08:53 PM, Adam Števko wrote:
>
> Yes, the wider context exists. The idea is to make every possible step
> to move project out of decline.

As I see it there is not decline and in the opposite OI hipster is in
the best shape in years and getting many new contributions every day.

> There are few more things current developer have in the pipeline: 
>   - CoC (debated now),

It's not even called like that, and it can't be used before other things.
it can come active after making active community members and bodies, not
before.

>   - governing board elections,

There can be no any elections before there is active member community
formed and that is a process that can take up to a year.

>   - mission statement update,

That could exist even before, regularly it should come after all of
previous but for the sake of advancement, can be made, like the Roadmap
already exists and can be expanded.

So it seems it is all in somewhat different order, beginning with active
member community formation.

>   - new end-user documentation (based on Michael’s work),

Those big and wide articles, created by him, are not in the shape to be
called documents.
Texts are non audited, and full of badly shaped wording.

They haven't been checked through on-Wiki contribution process and they
are not by any means documents of Openindiana.
Also there is nothing "new" with them, whole handbook idea is pulled
from OI Wiki and there are all those nice articles already.

poll you started awhile ago can't be used to mandate it, because it
lacks registration and anyone could enter data in it. rigging results.

>   - oi-userland changes and further simplifications to lower barrier
> for contributing. There will be a call for new package contributions,

With thing you say here, you are out of topic and you better put them
somewhere on your personal blog.

>   - new ways to try out and develop OI (vagrant boxes, qcow2 images
> and netboot.xyz integration),
>   - some infrastructure work (wiki update, long needed cleanup and
> reorganization, infra reinstall and better coverage via more mirrors),

>   - forum, so people can communicate and help each other (it seems
> that mailing lists and IRC channels are not sufficient),

This is a terrible idea if it is not linked to existing mailing list.
if is great idea if it is linked and exchange messages with existing
mailing list, it is great thing.
If linked, that can elevate from the need of maintaining separate usernames,
plus "centralized" one-site forums are monolithic and do not provide any
democracy in it,
since they are goverened by one man, top-down, allow deleting of
messages, like they never existed,
large misuse of accounts, etc.
So not great idea if not linked to existing mailing list.

>   - stable version based on hipster (/dev -> /stable will be a
> seamless transition. So far, plain upgrade works, but zones complicate
> it a little bit and that has to be sorted out).

/stable is nice to hear but I am not sure if you have idea what it means.

I proposed for old /dev to new /dev transition, where new /dev can be
refreshed from /hipster from time to time.
That could work, but /stable?.. That can come after number of new /dev
releases but not sure if it can be called like that any time soon,
because there needs to be at least several people dedicated to
maintaining it and breakages in it needs even more testing and support
then landing into new /dev .
So maybe smartest thing woudl be to land into new, refreshed /dev form
/hipster and let people try out regular pushes to it over at least one
year, before thinking of /stable.

> There is a lot of work to be done, but unless we can get more
> developers on board, not everything can be accomplished in reasonable
> time. With stable release, we might need a few more devs, who could
> fill the ranks and help with maintenance. So I hope that the order of
> steps is logical and reasonable to everybody. To be clear, some things
> are already happening (mostly technical related). Political ones are a
> matter of discussion of course and shall be discussed and further
> agreed. The idea is to come up with some proposal, which could be
> discussed.

I hope you wouldn't recommend as leader for the whole distribution.
I think you are not ready for it. You just don't listen good enough and
tend to ignore important things.
For all other things, including operational things you already do
managing infrastructure, ok.

>
> This list is very brief and I could write a blog post detailing every
> point if interested. However, it will take me a few days. Just let me
> know if you want to have it in more details or enough information was
> provided.

You better write it on your private blog, anyway.
It could be separated into projects but make sure to consult before
trying to put it on the roadmap.

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

On 07/24/16 08:20 PM, Adam Števko wrote:
> Hi Till,
>
> I added slightly modified draft to 
> http://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/Code+of+Conduct+proposals and it contains the 
> sentence you wanted, but slightly modified and expanded:

Please don't change name of the document when editing it, for existing
Wiki page.
It is named:
Core principles and expectations have "(Code of Conduct)" in it and that
is satisfying the need to refer to it by the other acronym.

>
> Always seek to maintain a welcoming environment for new contributors.
>   • Welcome new people to the project and guide them in their 
> contributions.
>   • Give them the time you were given when you first joined the community.
>   • And if you weren't given enough time please set a new example for 
> others to live by.

These changes have been integrated into existing newest text , changing
several wording in it.
They are mostly already covered and  there is no need to have sub-dots
because it looks confusing.
Things can be as short as possible for better understanding.

> Modifications come from former OSOL CoC. I hope you like this even better.
>
> Cheers,
> Adam

It is not ideal as an idea.
Pople like to use their free time as they like and free time is
important resource and asking them to devote more time at the first
sight is a big requirement.
I added similar wording that is much shorter and recommends the same
(Give more time then received)

If anyone mention Opensolaris similar document , it says "Be Inclusive"
and that is important message. Being inclusive turns off policing.

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-24 Thread Adam Števko

Hello everybody,

I added draft of proposed CoC to wiki here: 
http://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/Code+of+Conduct+proposals

I modified the Wiki entry to contain both versions.

Modified version of initial CoC text contains following changes:

- added to "Core principles and expectations:” part:

• Always seek to maintain a welcoming environment for new contributors.
• Welcome new people to the project and guide them in their 
contributions.
• Give them the time you were given when you first joined the community.
• And if you weren't given enough time please set a new example for 
others to live by.
• Be open and transparent so others can participate on an equal footing and 
contribute to the project in their own way.
• Everyone has something to contribute.

- added to “What will not be tolerated:” part:

Discrimination based on gender, race, nationality, sexuality, religion, age or 
physical disability.

- “Reporting violations” part was changed:
• Violations of the CoC should be reported to the distribution 
maintainers via ab...@openindiana.org.
• Neither reporters nor reported persons will, or should be, 
made public.
• Upon receipt of a problem report, the distribution maintainers will 
investigate the issue and determine whether it warrants further action. Any 
further action will be proportional to the severity of the problem.

Changed things are based on former OpenSolaris Code of Conduct and 
solicitations from the OpenIndiana community.

I hope that people are OK with these changes. I also expect this to be the 
final draft unless some comments appear.

Cheers,
Adam

> On Jul 24, 2016, at 5:56 PM, Aurélien Larcher  
> wrote:
> 
> 
> Le 24 juil. 2016 17:17, Nikola M  a écrit :
>> 
>> On 07/24/16 05:10 PM, Nikola M wrote:
>>> As long it is there site is under occupation from that troll document.
>> 
>> And I won't try to change it anymore, since Aurelien objected and want
>> it unchanged for whatever reason it is...
>> Wanting to have document unchanged is obvious obstacle in community
>> process, but hey, you have it..
>> 
> 
> I just object to change without consultation of authors. :)
> 
> Adam, would you mind adding at least a référence to the WIP on the wiki and a 
> line of context  to specify that the proposed document is only a basis and 
> subject to improvement and acceptance by the community ?
> 
>> 
>> ___
>> oi-dev mailing list
>> oi-dev@openindiana.org
>> http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
> ___
> oi-dev mailing list
> oi-dev@openindiana.org
> http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-24 Thread Adam Števko

Hi Peter,

> On Jul 22, 2016, at 2:00 PM, Peter Tribble  wrote:
> 
> Adam,
> 
> Thanks for doing this. In my view, it's long overdue.

Thanks for you support. It might be long overdue, but rather late than never.  
I hope this step will make former developers come back.

> Comments below.
> 
> As part of a larger effort at providing a more formal governance structure 
> for the OpenIndiana project,
> 
> So, there is a wider context to this. Which is a good thing, but it would be 
> good to have
> that fleshed out. Not necessarily conclusions, but it would be good for the 
> community at
> large to understand what's missing and what's being done about it.

Yes, the wider context exists. The idea is to make every possible step to move 
project out of decline. There are few more things current developer have in the 
pipeline:
  - CoC (debated now),
  - governing board elections,
  - mission statement update,

  - new end-user documentation (based on Michael’s work),
  - oi-userland changes and further simplifications to lower barrier for 
contributing. There will be a call for new package contributions,
  - new ways to try out and develop OI (vagrant boxes, qcow2 images and 
netboot.xyz integration),
  - some infrastructure work (wiki update, long needed cleanup and 
reorganization, infra reinstall and better coverage via more mirrors),
  - forum, so people can communicate and help each other (it seems that mailing 
lists and IRC channels are not sufficient),

  - stable version based on hipster (/dev -> /stable will be a seamless 
transition. So far, plain upgrade works, but zones complicate it a little bit 
and that has to be sorted out).

There is a lot of work to be done, but unless we can get more developers on 
board, not everything can be accomplished in reasonable time. With stable 
release, we might need a few more devs, who could fill the ranks and help with 
maintenance. So I hope that the order of steps is logical and reasonable to 
everybody. To be clear, some things are already happening (mostly technical 
related). Political ones are a matter of discussion of course and shall be 
discussed and further agreed. The idea is to come up with some proposal, which 
could be discussed.

This list is very brief and I could write a blog post detailing every point if 
interested. However, it will take me a few days. Just let me know if you want 
to have it in more details or enough information was provided.

> 
> I’d like to announce on the behalf of OI developers the adoption of an 
> OpenIndiana Code of Conduct. The draft text for this new document can be 
> found at http://www.openindiana.org/community/code-of-conduct/ 
> .
> 
> We would also like to point out this draft document is open to discussion and 
> acceptance by the community.
> Our desire is for the discussion to be civil and for it to center around the 
> verbiage of the Code of Conduct.
> We do not wish for the discussion to go off topic, or question the need for 
> such a document.
> 
> Please compose your thoughts and comment with as few replies as necessary so 
> the community may solidify the final text of this document.
> 
> Overall, I'm happy with most of this. It's about the right length, as well.
> 
> I think you need an explicit reporting mechanism. Something like "email 
> ab...@openindiana.org "
> or the like. (Of course, you need that to be routed somewhere.) And the first 
> statement about
> confidentiality means that the 2nd part about not being made public is 
> redundant. There's also
> no mention of consequences.

Michael and I slightly modified our initial proposal to include your points:
Violations of the CoC should be reported to the distribution maintainers via 
ab...@openindiana.org .
Neither reporters nor reported persons will, or should be, made public.
Upon receipt of a problem report, the distribution maintainers will investigate 
the issue and determine whether it warrants further action. Any further action 
will be proportional to the severity of the problem.
I also discussed your points with Alexander in Saint Petersburg and we came to 
the conclusions that mentioning every possible way to handle punishment would 
be a much longer list. So, we thought that putting it this way is better.
I hope that you are OK with it. If you have any further comments, please let us 
know.

Cheers,
Adam

signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-24 Thread Adam Števko

Hi Till,

I added slightly modified draft to 
http://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/Code+of+Conduct+proposals and it contains the 
sentence you wanted, but slightly modified and expanded:

Always seek to maintain a welcoming environment for new contributors.
• Welcome new people to the project and guide them in their 
contributions.
• Give them the time you were given when you first joined the community.
• And if you weren't given enough time please set a new example for 
others to live by.

Modifications come from former OSOL CoC. I hope you like this even better.

Cheers,
Adam

> On Jul 20, 2016, at 10:04 AM, Till Wegmüller  wrote:
> 
> On 18.07.2016 23:35, Adam Števko wrote:
>> 
>> Please compose your thoughts and comment with as few replies as
>> necessary so the community may solidify the final text of this document.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Adam
>> 
> 
> Hi Adam, Hi Nikola
> 
> Thanks both of you for the work put into this.
> 
> Here are my thought and comments:
> When reading Adams text it refers to a body of Leadership. Both source 
> Projects (FreeBSD and FiFo) have such a Role defined. Do we have that?
> 
> Adams text is more worded towards being a set of rules. Nikolas more in the 
> sense of expectations. I prefer expectations.
> 
> When I read the words "will not be tolerated" it imediatly raises the 
> question what will hapen if i break those? Who punishes and how? In my 
> opinion "Discouraged behaviour" is the better wording.
> 
> I prefer the managing misuse and escalation section over the reporting 
> violations. We have a very friendly community. There should not be a need to 
> involve a third party to resolve issues from the very beginning.
> 
> The very notion of twitter is that everything is public.
> 
> I find the point "Maintain welcoming environment for new contributors and 
> guide them in contributions." very important. I would like to have that in.
> 
> What is the desired outcome of a code of conduct? Should it be a set of 
> rules? Or a set of expectations from each other? Is it assumed to be the same 
> for all codes of conducts? If so should we link to that definition? or do we 
> need to define that?
> 
> 
> Greetings
> Till
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> oi-dev mailing list
> oi-dev@openindiana.org
> http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

On 07/24/16 04:34 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:
> Bottom line is: you do not modify *existing* content without prior discussion.

Neither adding NEW documents nor editing should go without discussion
In this case new page was added out of blue and it denied changing it
nad ther IS ongoin discussion on this list and that can held as that
here IS discussion as it is.
And people deserve to see changed document.

> I reverted it to the state it should be.

It surely is not in a state it should be..
 ..not your revering has a meaning, but contributing to it's contents has.
But if that is how you define it as protecting of random changes, I
won't change it no more as said.

> Now discuss with people, agree on what should be on the Wiki and what should 
> be on the Website, then we change the website page accordingly, does it not 
> sound democratic ? ;)

I exactly changed web page to the current state of the things on Wiki,
calling on being on topic and talk about text itself, and that is
actually working and people talk and contribute with questions, answers
and ideas.

It is only democratic to pull the plug out of that page, showing that
unfunished undemocratic documents like that should not have democratic
support at all, promoting autoritarian rula and forcing it.

Other then that, democratic way could be having links on that page
pointing to Wiki so people can contribute there, but I choosed to have
both of them presented concurrently, old useless one and newer rewriting
of it.

Rules are broken by putting that document on site in the first place, so
deal with it however you want i showed how I dealt with it.

> Putting the draft on the website 

Drafts should absolutely not be on the official website!
That is misuse of term draft and of the website. People expect finished
agreed and supported things on the site.
Maybe on sub-site where is expected to have various things in private
spaces etc.

> may not have been the best solution but this is just a draft (hence 
> "Proposed") 

Putting one word before "mandated" and forced document, doesn't makes
things any better, it is even obvious that it is mocking to viewers,
where minimal effort is needed to _force_ it by removing it.
It is again how dictatorships work, having always worst case scenario
ready and presented.

> and at least it is visible and easy to read.
And is is grous misuse of community, let me not repeat myself..
So it is visible, but updated one is not supposed to be visible..

> In any case you have no right to decide to modify this document unilateraly, 
> so:

So xenol does not have right to PUT it on the site unilaterally.

And I have ALL right to change and rephrase and contribute improved
version as I did on wiki.

Plus I have rights on site to change documents, so why not I use them to
change?
Xenol used it's right to change, by putting it, I don't see the
difference here.

I just used my rights on site to change it , I already had and I also
made an effort to show differences in plainsight and put links and
explanations.

I have all rights, I logged in I changed it I discussed fully before it,
I haven't received any valid reasons not to, and it is still discussed upon.

> - we work on the drafts on the wiki with original version and your changes 
> presented on one page each.

That is obviously in the work, only think missing is that that bad
document of xenol is still on the site, frozen.

> - Adam and Michael took your comment about the publication to the Wordpress 
> into account into account, let them respond and we then modify the page 
> accordingly.

They are not elected in this community on any position,
Adfam and Michael do not rule in this community and I have no need to
wait for any of them for any decision, not only including this document.

Document can't be mandated by them nor put in force without proper
procedures,
and any future web site changes xenol will try to pushg in (like "docs")
site, putting out broken 'poll' "results woithout user registration etc.
are void.

At the top of that, no one can mandate and forbid to people to talk
discuss and contribute how they see fit or to stop changes.
This document precisely gags people form discussing and having basic
human freedoms, therefore putting it back online without notice that
hings ar emoving on forward put whole community in a wrong picture.

> - the website stays off topic  until we reach the final version of the 
> document.
>
> Is it OK ?

No it is not, because freezing that fascist document on site, pushes
people to believe that "power" over infrastructure is important here and
that "powerfull" can stop anyone else doing the right thing.
People tend to even say things without even looking,
and it is obvious that pushing document on the site is avoiding any
procedure and community effort and that is bad behaviour that tend to
spread.
As long it is there site is under occupation from that troll document.

You can of course do whatever you want, it's always your

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-24 Thread Aurélien Larcher



À dim. juil. 24 15:51:36 2016 GMT+0200, Nikola M a écrit :
> On 07/24/16 02:00 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 24, 2016 at 11:32 AM, Nikola M  wrote:
> >> On 07/23/16 01:11 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
>  Web page
>  http://www.openindiana.org/community/code-of-conduct/
>  have been updated with the latest on-Wiki version with links for editing 
>  and
>  contribution to the text.
> >>> A page should not be modified without discussing with its authors
> >>> first and asking for review when applicable.
> >> Page should not be pushed on site, before discussing and making it
> >> better in the first place, before it ended up on Site.
> > That's a good point but the discussion could have taken place without
> > all the drama,
> 
> Drama is created when it is posted on site without any previous
> discussion, like mandating it.
> 
> Since it is posted by one guy and the other guy requested to be on site,
> it is only natural to be able to change it then,
> instead that would be mandating and forcing it as it is now, forced to
> be on site unchanged.
> 
> > In any case it does not justify hijacking and modifying the page on the 
> > website.
> 
> I hujacked nothing, I have a rights on site to change pages, and I used
> that right to do a good thing and show that it is not dictatorship and
> that we have right to change it and have a right to not accept dictatorship.
> 
> > Since you create a work space on the Wiki I leave to Adam and Michael
> > to decide what they want to do with the website page.
> 
> They are not by any mean pointed by noone to mandate things in Openindiana.
> 
> And especially make such obviously anti community documents.
> 
> > In any case, reverting the page without notice should not have happened 
> > again.
> 
> And you just did revert it , twice...
>

Bottom line is: you do not modify *existing* content without prior discussion.
I reverted it to the state it should be.

Now discuss with people, agree on what should be on the Wiki and what should be 
on the Website, then we change the website page accordingly, does it not sound 
democratic ? ;)

Putting the draft on the website may not have been the best solution but this 
is just a draft (hence "Proposed") and at least it is visible and easy to read.

In any case you have no right to decide to modify this document unilateraly, so:
- we work on the drafts on the wiki with original version and your changes 
presented on one page each.
- Adam and Michael took your comment about the publication to the Wordpress 
into account into account, let them respond and we then modify the page 
accordingly.
- the website stays off topic  until we reach the final version of the document.

Is it OK ?
 
> > As you do not seem to agree, you will have to go through moderation on
> > the website until we sort out the Code of Conduct discussions
> 
> I have put my head on the plate to make Openindiana better  and since
> you reverted it back , twice, i have no intentions fo doing it anymore.
> It is enough for me that I protested by putting changed document for
> everyone to see and if you insist that it remains unchanged for no
> apparent reason, I can't change it forever.
> 
> People watching page can think that is OI document and surely OI is not
> fascist dictatorship supported by trolls, like presented in that document.
> 
> It is important to stress and be remembered that I did everything in my
> abilities to turn attention to such bad practice, bad behavior of trying
> to mandate community documents with fascist utopia,
> and put site contents with such an important document online, without
> community approval and prior dissicussion , and that is what Adam
> (Xenol) did.
> 
> So violation is on xenol side and if anyone hijacked site it is xenol.
> 
> Defending non-discussed web site posting by forbidding that it can be
> changed for something less fascist is by definition hijacking the site
> and disrupting community process and as it is shown, it is not me.
> 
> 
> ___
> oi-dev mailing list
> oi-dev@openindiana.org
> http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-de

-- 
Thanks for sailing Jolla :)
___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

On 07/24/16 02:00 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 24, 2016 at 11:32 AM, Nikola M  wrote:
>> On 07/23/16 01:11 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
 Web page
 http://www.openindiana.org/community/code-of-conduct/
 have been updated with the latest on-Wiki version with links for editing 
 and
 contribution to the text.
>>> A page should not be modified without discussing with its authors
>>> first and asking for review when applicable.
>> Page should not be pushed on site, before discussing and making it
>> better in the first place, before it ended up on Site.
> That's a good point but the discussion could have taken place without
> all the drama,

Drama is created when it is posted on site without any previous
discussion, like mandating it.

Since it is posted by one guy and the other guy requested to be on site,
it is only natural to be able to change it then,
instead that would be mandating and forcing it as it is now, forced to
be on site unchanged.

> In any case it does not justify hijacking and modifying the page on the 
> website.

I hujacked nothing, I have a rights on site to change pages, and I used
that right to do a good thing and show that it is not dictatorship and
that we have right to change it and have a right to not accept dictatorship.

> Since you create a work space on the Wiki I leave to Adam and Michael
> to decide what they want to do with the website page.

They are not by any mean pointed by noone to mandate things in Openindiana.

And especially make such obviously anti community documents.

> In any case, reverting the page without notice should not have happened again.

And you just did revert it , twice...

> As you do not seem to agree, you will have to go through moderation on
> the website until we sort out the Code of Conduct discussions

I have put my head on the plate to make Openindiana better  and since
you reverted it back , twice, i have no intentions fo doing it anymore.
It is enough for me that I protested by putting changed document for
everyone to see and if you insist that it remains unchanged for no
apparent reason, I can't change it forever.

People watching page can think that is OI document and surely OI is not
fascist dictatorship supported by trolls, like presented in that document.

It is important to stress and be remembered that I did everything in my
abilities to turn attention to such bad practice, bad behavior of trying
to mandate community documents with fascist utopia,
and put site contents with such an important document online, without
community approval and prior dissicussion , and that is what Adam
(Xenol) did.

So violation is on xenol side and if anyone hijacked site it is xenol.

Defending non-discussed web site posting by forbidding that it can be
changed for something less fascist is by definition hijacking the site
and disrupting community process and as it is shown, it is not me.

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-24 Thread Aurélien Larcher

On Sun, Jul 24, 2016 at 11:32 AM, Nikola M  wrote:
> On 07/23/16 01:11 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>> Web page
>>> http://www.openindiana.org/community/code-of-conduct/
>>> have been updated with the latest on-Wiki version with links for editing and
>>> contribution to the text.
>> A page should not be modified without discussing with its authors
>> first and asking for review when applicable.
>
> Page should not be pushed on site, before discussing and making it
> better in the first place, before it ended up on Site.

That's a good point but the discussion could have taken place without
all the drama,
In any case it does not justify hijacking and modifying the page on the website.

Since you create a work space on the Wiki I leave to Adam and Michael
to decide what they want to do with the website page.

In any case, reverting the page without notice should not have happened again.
As you do not seem to agree, you will have to go through moderation on
the website until we sort out the Code of Conduct discussions

Kind regards,

Aurélien

>
> This is very important document and I SHOULD be changed on Wiki.
> Pushing it on site and making appearance of not changeable at this
> stage, can hurt community for a long time and it represents noticeable
> exception.
>
> Plus "author" of important OI documents is the community, so it must be
> changing.
>
> This is core OI document and respectfully it sends wrong information to
> the people that it is already carved in the stone, so mistake was
> putting it on the site in the first place.
>
>> Reworking two versions of Code of Conduct on the Wiki
>
> There are nor ever could be "2 versions" There is One OI and there is
> absolutely need for that.
>
> Simply, negative parts in previous incarnations are fixed, everyone free
> to contribute.
>
>> is a good idea
>
> No it is not good idea, because it leads to fragmentation.
> There is this topic to put more ideas here and Wiki too, there is more
> then enough ways to contribute to it.
>
>> and I am positive about such process if both versions are presented
>> for comparison and discussion.
>
> Again there are NO  conflicting . Thre is one working document, and
> there is Wiki.
> If it was thought the better way before pushing it at first place,
> things would go more smoothly till now.
> There are only reasoning and reasons that counts.
>
> Plus document can't be made active, before creating active community
> membership and OI body that can make it official..
>
>>
>>> Latest document revision, free to edit is on:
>>> http://wiki.openindiana.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=31391953
>>>
>>> Feel free to further contribute to the document writing process on Wiki
>>> or feel free to express wanted changes as a part of discussion.
>>
>> However I will revert now the website page to the original version
>
> Ok, I will revert it back to the new version, that explains that that
> fascist part of the document have been fixed.
>
> You are free to do whatever you want, but telling people that there is
> no working document and supporting destroying of user and human rights.
>
> There is the reason why there is posted in a changed way.
> And please dont' rever it to anything, until it is changed on Wiki.
>
>
>> since the modification occurred without any consultation.
>
> Also putting it on site occurred without any public consultation and
> revision process..
>
> Now you have public information.
>
>> History being preserved you will be able to copy/paste from it if needed
> Aether remove it from site (some people already said they want to be
> there seen)
> or there is current page on it.
>
> Putting old document on site have no benefits, nor supporting clear
> fascist tendencies in it.
>
>> Every time I created a user account on OpenIndiana's WordPress, I
>> explained that the informal rule is: ask for review and do not modify
>
> Yes, xenol didn't follow this rule, when putting he's document on site.
> if just appeared without public discussion for such important thing.
> Then since that rule is broken butting on it does not apply for it.
>
> I warned before that "Site is not wiki" ,
> and I am fully ashamed to even see such fascist document on site, so
> aether change it to current one, or remove it form site.
>
>> existing content without discussing with original authors. Let us keep
>> it that way.
>
> Let's not.
> Because this is most important thing in OI community right now.
> and reverting changes back would make problems alive again, that Adam's
> document made dispensary.
>
> If you want to contribute, do it on WIKI, then you can refresh it on
> site, like i painfully did.
>
> That fascist thing will not be on site.
>
>
> ___
> oi-dev mailing list
> oi-dev@openindiana.org
> http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev



-- 
---
Praise the Caffeine embeddings

___
oi-dev mailing list

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

On 07/23/16 01:11 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> Web page
>> http://www.openindiana.org/community/code-of-conduct/
>> have been updated with the latest on-Wiki version with links for editing and
>> contribution to the text.
> A page should not be modified without discussing with its authors
> first and asking for review when applicable.

Putting information that there is community process instead of fascist
autocracy presented in unchanged document is important.

Aether non-fascist document on site or presenting there is the process I
think it is fair to see that there are differences.

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

On 07/23/16 01:11 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> Web page
>> http://www.openindiana.org/community/code-of-conduct/
>> have been updated with the latest on-Wiki version with links for editing and
>> contribution to the text.
> A page should not be modified without discussing with its authors
> first and asking for review when applicable.

Page should not be pushed on site, before discussing and making it
better in the first place, before it ended up on Site.

This is very important document and I SHOULD be changed on Wiki.
Pushing it on site and making appearance of not changeable at this
stage, can hurt community for a long time and it represents noticeable
exception.

Plus "author" of important OI documents is the community, so it must be
changing.

This is core OI document and respectfully it sends wrong information to
the people that it is already carved in the stone, so mistake was
putting it on the site in the first place.

> Reworking two versions of Code of Conduct on the Wiki 

There are nor ever could be "2 versions" There is One OI and there is
absolutely need for that.

Simply, negative parts in previous incarnations are fixed, everyone free
to contribute.

> is a good idea

No it is not good idea, because it leads to fragmentation.
There is this topic to put more ideas here and Wiki too, there is more
then enough ways to contribute to it.

> and I am positive about such process if both versions are presented
> for comparison and discussion.

Again there are NO  conflicting . Thre is one working document, and
there is Wiki.
If it was thought the better way before pushing it at first place,
things would go more smoothly till now.
There are only reasoning and reasons that counts.

Plus document can't be made active, before creating active community
membership and OI body that can make it official..

>
>> Latest document revision, free to edit is on:
>> http://wiki.openindiana.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=31391953
>>
>> Feel free to further contribute to the document writing process on Wiki
>> or feel free to express wanted changes as a part of discussion.
>
> However I will revert now the website page to the original version

Ok, I will revert it back to the new version, that explains that that
fascist part of the document have been fixed.

You are free to do whatever you want, but telling people that there is
no working document and supporting destroying of user and human rights.

There is the reason why there is posted in a changed way.
And please dont' rever it to anything, until it is changed on Wiki.

> since the modification occurred without any consultation.

Also putting it on site occurred without any public consultation and
revision process..

Now you have public information.

> History being preserved you will be able to copy/paste from it if needed
Aether remove it from site (some people already said they want to be
there seen)
or there is current page on it.

Putting old document on site have no benefits, nor supporting clear
fascist tendencies in it.

> Every time I created a user account on OpenIndiana's WordPress, I
> explained that the informal rule is: ask for review and do not modify

Yes, xenol didn't follow this rule, when putting he's document on site.
if just appeared without public discussion for such important thing.
Then since that rule is broken butting on it does not apply for it.

I warned before that "Site is not wiki" ,
and I am fully ashamed to even see such fascist document on site, so
aether change it to current one, or remove it form site.

> existing content without discussing with original authors. Let us keep
> it that way.

Let's not.
Because this is most important thing in OI community right now.
and reverting changes back would make problems alive again, that Adam's
document made dispensary.

If you want to contribute, do it on WIKI, then you can refresh it on
site, like i painfully did.

That fascist thing will not be on site.

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

On 07/23/16 11:31 AM, Michael Schuster wrote:
> I'd add
>   c. People make mistakes. :-)

That is right, that is why people's personalities are not in the focus
point and they can change over time.
It is expected to make mistakes, all the time, even software makes
mistakes not only people :P

If everything moves through more brains it is more probable that someone
would notice a bug/s in a reasoning etc :)

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

On 07/23/16 11:27 AM, Peter Tribble wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 6:30 AM, Nikola M  > wrote:
>
> On 07/22/16 02:00 PM, Peter Tribble wrote:
>> Overall, I'm happy with most of this. It's about the right
>> length, as well.
> What are you actually happy with?
>
>
> I'm happy with the original document that Adam posted, with the caveat
> that I
> think the reporting mechanism can and should be tightened.
>  
>
> I can say I could be happy with the first affirmative part, that
> is from the time of original posting changed, but not the second
> part with restrictions and secrecy.
>
> Have you seen working version at:
> http://wiki.openindiana.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=31391953
> because document is edited in open, not in closed and on Wiki
> instead on the site.
>
>
> Indeed I have. Your modified version is flawed in the following ways:

I hope I explained in good words why changed version is much better, I
thank you for contribution and please add more if you want more things
to add etc.

>
> 1. The title has been changed. "Code of Conduct" is the normal term,
> use it if that's what is intended

Normal term is what we choose to use.
We have SMF, for example and that is "normal term" for us, so we have a
freedom to call it how ever we want. So there is no "normal" term at
all. is using Linux "normal", then what we are doing here then? We can
differ and will.
So we can choose whatever wanting, and I have put "Core Principles and
Expectations", because it more suits the need, beter explains use and
contents and yes, it is "different" from the rest of the world that is
"normal" and using Linux...
Of course if someone thinks web page link could be differently named or
also putting it by another, more known name, too, it can be done, but
no, we don't have to be "the same".
Oi already have myriad of differently named terms that use similar but
not the same thing as other systems.
We need to have a space to inovate including out own terminology and
meaning of it etc.

> 2. It conflates operational procedures and etiquette with conduct.
> (There may be
> a place for a "how we operate" document; this is not it.)

That is right. Good that you mention it.
Core Principles and Expectations (CPE) (or CoC) is there for community,
as general showing fo values that can be used to benefit community en
large, precisely avoiding unneeded restrictions, wording that could turn
people away or even managerial parts.

Actually when having good text there that makes managerial (operating)
document(s) much easier to organize and puts less work on shoulders of
operating people on all levels.
Separate documents can describe operations, yes and there is no room for
pushing them into this document.

Actually, CPE provides good environment and positive attitude stating
values. It is unfortunate actually to even mention any procedures in it,
but they are mostly relaxed for operations to have less work to do and
that EVERY community member, even not yet member of some working group
or active member, can use CPE to operate communication in most positive
way right ahead.

> 3. It does not make clear what is not tolerated (the list Adam gave
> covers the
> problems we see much more accurately)

There is absolutely need for such harsh wording in Openindiana
community, nor turning against people.
_Everything is tolerated_, if it does not conflict with Core Principles
and Expectations.
And it is very easy to find out if something conflicts, comparing with CPE.

As things are best to be growing organically, they are much better as
gaining more experience, also people react much better to positive and
supporting principles and create healthy environment.

It is obvious that as put firstly, "nontoleration" part is turned
against itself, too and (forgive me if I am repeating myself) whole that
nontoleration section is Trolling heaven and can't come back.

Nontoleration and exclusiveness can't mix with toleration, inclusiveness
and OI community. Just seeing "non tolerable" part in text induces wrong
feeling that contributing is all about power. It is not, it is about
principles.

> 4. It does not provide a mechanism to manage violations. Such a mechanism
> should be confidential. (Confidential, not secret.) Why?

Of course it provides it. For starter there are NO 'violations' as term
so no need to manage them.
Hence, less chance to even have any problem.

'Discouraged behavior' part should actually not be needed, and document
can function nicely without it, but it mentions few things.

And 'Managing misuse escalation' is what you are looking for.
It separates that channels of communications can have somewhat different
requirements, that there could be groups to self-organize and that there
are many different maintainers of various parts and channels, that
should manage those parts.
So no centralization per se and no bumping one's head all the time

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

On 07/23/16 06:01 PM, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> On 07/21/16 07:47 PM, Nikola M wrote:
>> Or someone really thinking that fascist autocracy is a good thing to try
>> on OI people.
>
>> Intentionally not seeing any problems in it induces the question of
>> using a brain at all.
>
> So everyone who disagrees with you is a brainless fascist and that's why
> you've unilaterally decided to ignore all of their opnions and replace
> the
> webpage they'd reached consensus on with yours that has no other support?

You mistake word "everyone and second, do not use 'you' in right context
and thirdly it's about topic not people.

Everyone needs to have some good reason to have an opinion.
If there is not good reason to support or not support something or even
not having opinion, how much that message counts then or what is
supposed to be thinking about?

At least providing reasons or explanations why something one thinks ,
can help value it and improve and represents contribution. Othewise it's
meaningless to just say 'yeah right' not even thinging about something.

> You do realize that sort of anti-social, disruptive, obstructionist
> behavior is exactly why this was proposed and continuing to act that
> way is just convincing more and more people the original proposal is
> necessary to allow people to work on OI without having to have these
> horrible fights all the time that just chase people away?
>
> -alan-

MOST anti social and disruptive thig in this topic is trying to put talk
about people insted of topic.

We have here a tryout to put THAT antisocial behaviour in the core of
openindiana , by selecting battle agains PEOPLE instead of topics.

I already told you that is trolling and also parts of Adam's published
'code are injecting the same trolling into community as a norm.

I call for valid reasons for ANYTHING , if there are not vlaid reasons,
one better get some or not waste a time.

I already told you, alanc all this and you make same mistake again.

There is not any fight, but what you make it, people NEED to discuss and
some fascist ideas about gagging it and putting 'power' in the centre won.

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-23 Thread Glenn Holmer

On 07/23/2016 11:01 AM, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> On 07/21/16 07:47 PM, Nikola M wrote:
>> Or someone really thinking that fascist autocracy is a good thing to try
>> on OI people.
> 
>> Intentionally not seeing any problems in it induces the question of
>> using a brain at all.
> 
> So everyone who disagrees with you is a brainless fascist and that's why
> you've unilaterally decided to ignore all of their opnions and replace the
> webpage they'd reached consensus on with yours that has no other support?
> 
> You do realize that sort of anti-social, disruptive, obstructionist
> behavior is exactly why this was proposed and continuing to act that
> way is just convincing more and more people the original proposal is
> necessary to allow people to work on OI without having to have these
> horrible fights all the time that just chase people away?

+1, this needs to end.

-- 
Glenn Holmer (Linux registered user #16682)
"After the vintage season came the aftermath -- and Cenbe."

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-23 Thread Reginald Beardsley via oi-dev

I have been deleting this thread since shortly after it began.  However, no 
matter what the topic if Alan has something to say I will read it.   I agree 
entirely with Adam's efforts and Alan's comment.  I don't think anything more 
need be said.

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-23 Thread Alan Coopersmith


On 07/21/16 07:47 PM, Nikola M wrote:

Or someone really thinking that fascist autocracy is a good thing to try
on OI people.



Intentionally not seeing any problems in it induces the question of
using a brain at all.


So everyone who disagrees with you is a brainless fascist and that's why
you've unilaterally decided to ignore all of their opnions and replace the
webpage they'd reached consensus on with yours that has no other support?

You do realize that sort of anti-social, disruptive, obstructionist
behavior is exactly why this was proposed and continuing to act that
way is just convincing more and more people the original proposal is
necessary to allow people to work on OI without having to have these
horrible fights all the time that just chase people away?

-alan-



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-23 Thread Aurélien Larcher

Hi,

> Web page
> http://www.openindiana.org/community/code-of-conduct/
> have been updated with the latest on-Wiki version with links for editing and
> contribution to the text.

A page should not be modified without discussing with its authors
first and asking for review when applicable.

Reworking two versions of Code of Conduct on the Wiki is a good idea
and I am positive about such process if both versions are presented
for comparison and discussion.

> Latest document revision, free to edit is on:
> http://wiki.openindiana.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=31391953
>
> Feel free to further contribute to the document writing process on Wiki
> or feel free to express wanted changes as a part of discussion.


However I will revert now the website page to the original version
since the modification occurred without any consultation.
History being preserved you will be able to copy/paste from it if needed

Every time I created a user account on OpenIndiana's WordPress, I
explained that the informal rule is: ask for review and do not modify
existing content without discussing with original authors. Let us keep
it that way.
Kind regards

Aurélien

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-23 Thread Michael Schuster

On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 11:27 AM, Peter Tribble 
wrote:

> 4. It does not provide a mechanism to manage violations. Such a mechanism
> should be confidential. (Confidential, not secret.) Why?
>  a. Problems can become acrimonious and turn into a flamewar
>  b. People should be comfortable to report problems without fear of
> retribution
>

I'd add
  c. People make mistakes. :-)

cheers
michael
-- 
Michael Schuster
http://recursiveramblings.wordpress.com/
recursion, n: see 'recursion'
___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-23 Thread Peter Tribble

On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 6:30 AM, Nikola M  wrote:

> On 07/22/16 02:00 PM, Peter Tribble wrote:
>
> Overall, I'm happy with most of this. It's about the right length, as well.
>
> What are you actually happy with?
>

I'm happy with the original document that Adam posted, with the caveat that
I
think the reporting mechanism can and should be tightened.

> I can say I could be happy with the first affirmative part, that is from
> the time of original posting changed, but not the second part with
> restrictions and secrecy.
>
> Have you seen working version at:
> http://wiki.openindiana.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=31391953
> because document is edited in open, not in closed and on Wiki instead on
> the site.
>

Indeed I have. Your modified version is flawed in the following ways:

1. The title has been changed. "Code of Conduct" is the normal term,
use it if that's what is intended

2. It conflates operational procedures and etiquette with conduct. (There
may be
a place for a "how we operate" document; this is not it.)

3. It does not make clear what is not tolerated (the list Adam gave covers
the
problems we see much more accurately)

4. It does not provide a mechanism to manage violations. Such a mechanism
should be confidential. (Confidential, not secret.) Why?
 a. Problems can become acrimonious and turn into a flamewar
 b. People should be comfortable to report problems without fear of
retribution

5. It fails to provide adequate attribution

-- 
-Peter Tribble
http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/
___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-23 Thread Nikola M

On 07/18/16 11:35 PM, Adam Števko wrote:
> Hello,
>
> As part of a larger effort at providing a more formal governance
> structure for the OpenIndiana project, I’d like to announce on the
> behalf of OI developers the adoption of an OpenIndiana Code of
> Conduct. The draft text for this new document can be found
> at http://www.openindiana.org/community/code-of-conduct/.

Hello all,

Web page
http://www.openindiana.org/community/code-of-conduct/
have been updated with the latest on-Wiki version with links for editing
and contribution to the text.

Latest document revision, free to edit is on:
http://wiki.openindiana.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=31391953

Feel free to further contribute to the document writing process on Wiki
or feel free to express wanted changes as a part of discussion.

Thank you for contributing to Openindiana community documents.

>
> We would also like to point out this draft document is open to
> discussion and acceptance by the community.
> Our desire is for the discussion to be civil and for it to center
> around the verbiage of the Code of Conduct.
> We do not wish for the discussion to go off topic, or question the
> need for such a document.
>
> Please compose your thoughts and comment with as few replies as
> necessary so the community may solidify the final text of this document.
>
> Cheers,
> Adam
>
>
> ___
> oi-dev mailing list
> oi-dev@openindiana.org
> http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-22 Thread Nikola M

On 07/22/16 02:00 PM, Peter Tribble wrote:
> Overall, I'm happy with most of this. It's about the right length, as
> well.

What are you actually happy with? I can say I could be happy with the
first affirmative part, that is from the time of original posting
changed, but not the second part with restrictions and secrecy.

Have you seen working version at:
http://wiki.openindiana.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=31391953
because document is edited in open, not in closed and on Wiki instead on
the site.

You should not seen document put on site by Adam, as something finished
and not even what will ever be used (and also can't be used because it
is conflicting with Openindiana organizing principles of inclusive
environment, that are still active)

On-site proposed version have not been reviewed before putting on the
site and includes non-precise section in the works, that it fixed in the
working version:

>
> Discouraged behavior :
>
>   * No personal witch hunt, based on anything toward a person(s).
>   * Advocating unsubscribing, other person removal, restrictions,
> filtering or personal negative public announcements.
>   * Not recognizing critique as the source of inspiration to make
> Openindiana better.
>

instead of:
>
>
> What will not be tolerated:
>
Because that section by itself is against it's own terms and actively
works against open development by limiting freedom of speech, freedom of
expression, freedom of contribution, induces negativity, and puts
EXCLUDING individuals on reasons only know to "ruling guy" (and in
secret!) instead of inclusive community that Openindiana started with
and still is.
Working against people and not discussing and fixing issues, presents
form of trolling.
Working against people and not topics it form of trolling.

> I think you need an explicit reporting mechanism. Something like
> "email ab...@openindiana.org "

Nothing can be reported, because there is no one elected to be reported
things to.
It would be against community principles to silently and secretly create
plots against people in Openindiana.
Document can't be activated because there is no governing body elected
in OI,
it can't be elected because there is no formed active community members
group.
There is no forming active members community group, because 'poll'
posted by Adam misused the chance to register and include new people in
the community.

There are several steps needed to fulfill before such document can be
mandated:
http://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/Website+Ideas

> or the like. (Of course, you need that to be routed somewhere.) And
> the first statement about
> confidentiality means that the 2nd part about not being made public is
> redundant. There's also
> no mention of consequences.

That is because in open community there is no need for consequences
because community is supposed to be self-regulated and not governed by
self-appointed  rulers.
As presented in managing section:

>
> Managing misuse escalation:
>
>   * Point new and existing community members to Openindiana principles
> and expectations.
>   * Inform and message community members to self-regulate it's own
> behavior.
>   * If you feel needed, consult others about ways of accepting new and
> modifying existing behavior of community members.
>   * If you find it important, contact IRC Channel operators, Mailing
> list administrator, Web site maintainer, Wiki editor and Project
> maintainer.
>
there is very long way to go till it ends up considered misusing.

Do you propose OI main functioning principle to be fear of consequences,
if fulfilling desires of ruling  individual. That is very bad
environment to work with and does not support freedom of expression and
is in general antihuman oriented and there is need for
community-facilitating in a positive and inclusive way.

Original proposed text in it's negative part, actually does not care
about community, people and having more contributors in.
It is non-precise and can be badly misused like that and rotates about
battling people instead of topics..
And actually, turning all organising priciple into a man-hunt, it
represent for of trolling, injected into code of conduct itself.

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-22 Thread Peter Tribble

Adam,

Thanks for doing this. In my view, it's long overdue.

Comments below.

As part of a larger effort at providing a more formal governance structure
> for the OpenIndiana project,
>

So, there is a wider context to this. Which is a good thing, but it would
be good to have
that fleshed out. Not necessarily conclusions, but it would be good for the
community at
large to understand what's missing and what's being done about it.


> I’d like to announce on the behalf of OI developers the adoption of an
> OpenIndiana Code of Conduct. The draft text for this new document can be
> found at http://www.openindiana.org/community/code-of-conduct/.
>
> We would also like to point out this draft document is open to discussion
> and acceptance by the community.
> Our desire is for the discussion to be civil and for it to center around
> the verbiage of the Code of Conduct.
> We do not wish for the discussion to go off topic, or question the need
> for such a document.
>
> Please compose your thoughts and comment with as few replies as necessary
> so the community may solidify the final text of this document.
>

Overall, I'm happy with most of this. It's about the right length, as well.

I think you need an explicit reporting mechanism. Something like "email
ab...@openindiana.org"
or the like. (Of course, you need that to be routed somewhere.) And the
first statement about
confidentiality means that the 2nd part about not being made public is
redundant. There's also
no mention of consequences.

-- 
-Peter Tribble
http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/
___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

On 07/22/16 06:23 AM, Glenn Holmer wrote:
> On 07/21/2016 09:47 PM, Nikola M wrote:
>> All "groups of selected people" are selected based on functions to be
>> doing, not selected by the "people" (!)

Just to notice, there is a mistake in the text here, made for rush and
not being a natural speaker.

It supposed to say that it is what abilities of people in a term of
expertise and good doing, counts
 and that topics and ideas counts, but that personal per-person
preferences are wrong.

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-21 Thread Glenn Holmer

On 07/21/2016 09:47 PM, Nikola M wrote:
> All "groups of selected people" are selected based on functions to be
> doing, not selected by the "people" (!)
> You are mixing community standards with ruling class fascism.
> Democracy and community are going hand in hand, what you are proposing
> and supporting in answers is a monstrous regime.

*PLONK*

-- 
Glenn Holmer (Linux registered user #16682)
"After the vintage season came the aftermath -- and Cenbe."

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

On 07/21/16 06:32 PM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Jul 2016, Nikola M wrote:
>>
>> You can change it further,
>> but the whole point is you can't know what you want if you don't even
>> look at things that are wrong with the current one. It is regarding
>> whole section for "retributals"/tirany-inspired/not tolerable unprecise
>> part.
>
> I see no problems with lack of precision as long as there are trusted
> people (sufficiently empowered) 

That is exactly what is wrong with it. And what is wrong with judgment.
One can not induce level of uncertainty and obvious have such wide terms
that induce and require tyranny as the norm.
As already explained, it puts "power" in the focus and battle for it,
instead of reasoning and discussing in a sane way over real topics.

> identified in advance who communicate amongst themselves 

This is the second problematic part, it suppose creating cast of rulers
who battle with "power" in between, further taking it apart, just
because some preciseness and unneeded wording injected here.
All "not tolerable" part is injected there to induce in toleration and
not understanding as a norm and that is the pinnacle of trolling. If
everything depends on judgment, then there is no resaon for it to be
written.
Tyranny as a norm - not today.

I am telling being not tolerable toward those spreading non-tolerance
and fascism is good cause.

> when there is a claimed problem 

So it is secretly, without any rules, put in a hand of few, who battle
in between and with the rest fo the people, so it is made in focus over
battling people and not talking about ideas. It sounds like fascist
manifesto/troll heaven to me.

> and come to a decision based on the facts at hand.  

Decision require having rules or at least guidances (and needed ones are
very short), not personal judgment.

Also if person/persons pushing such precise and negative part, do not
see clear problems that are intentionally created by but not really
clear mind, that are created for OI to tare it apart, how to trust a guy
that is so short-sigthed to "rule"??? "Making decisions in hand"  sounds
to me like trolling manifesto injected into OI.

Plus it is put on site like god-given and it can not be used at all
without governing board and members to elect it.
Or someone really thinking that fascist autocracy is a good thing to try
on OI people.

Core Principles and Expectations is there to say something positive to
people and provide guidance, not to enable ruling with the iron fist it
is all wrong to induce governing rules inside COMMUNITY document, that
have nothing to do with statue, operating principles, managerial things,
etc.
That whole section is a product of not very sane and short-sighted
"reasoning".

> This small group of selected people 

All "groups of selected people" are selected based on functions to be
doing, not selected by the "people" (!)
You are mixing community standards with ruling class fascism.
Democracy and community are going hand in hand, what you are proposing
and supporting in answers is a monstrous regime.

> then act like a judicial panel.  It is impossible to foresee every
> circumstance. 

That is exactly why it is so bad, it is a juvenile look at community
standards.

"Problems" that such bad wording is suppose to "solve" are non-existant,
induced and are based on twisting of the reality and painting it black
to facilitate imposter's goals. making problems, so to be able to say
that there are any problems to be solved by "the iron fist".
First creating nonexisting problems and personal power battle and then
solving them with the tyranny if what fascists do.

Actually, using one half of the brain to see the myriad of future
problems it induces is not that hard, using second half of the brain to
actually turn off justice and democracy and actual humanity is what is
very hard.
Intentionally not seeing any problems in it induces the question of
using a brain at all.

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-21 Thread Bob Friesenhahn


On Thu, 21 Jul 2016, Nikola M wrote:


You can change it further,
but the whole point is you can't know what you want if you don't even
look at things that are wrong with the current one. It is regarding
whole section for "retributals"/tirany-inspired/not tolerable unprecise
part.


I see no problems with lack of precision as long as there are trusted 
people (sufficiently empowered) identified in advance who communicate 
amongst themselves when there is a claimed problem and come to a 
decision based on the facts at hand.  This small group of selected 
people then act like a judicial panel.  It is impossible to foresee 
every circumstance.


Bob
--
Bob Friesenhahn
bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
GraphicsMagick Maintainer,http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

On 07/21/16 03:19 PM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> I did not have enough spare time to read all the words that you wrote
> but upon re-reading various proposals I am

Take your time, there are no various proposals, but only one spawned
from the original one.
http://wiki.openindiana.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=31391953

You can change it further,
but the whole point is you can't know what you want if you don't even
look at things that are wrong with the current one. It is regarding
whole section for "retributals"/tirany-inspired/not tolerable unprecise
part.

It is not the contents of minfull/mindless support or not, it is the
question wether you understand what is said or not.
If you don't even know what you are supporting, why supporting?

Obviously topic here is about contributing changes, editing and makin
git better, answering yes/no is meaningless.
There's wiki to contribute to it's not read-only web site.

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

On 07/21/16 04:08 AM, Michael Kruger wrote:
> Hello Johan,
>
> I'm sorry you view the adoption of a Code of Conduct as a slippery
> slope leading to an endless set of rules and regulations. And to
> anyone else feeling this way you have my sympathies as well.
>
> In my view I see the project is at a turning point and as Adam
> recently pointed out, the current situation is untenable and problematic.

Situation is not problematic at all. what makes you say that?
let's defuse this balloon for a second , being inflated with no reason.

>
> On many occasions I have heard people vocalize their frustrations
> regarding the inability to get anything done in a public venue. As a
> relatively new member of this community I have often felt that way
> myself.

There is nothing exact like that here explained, but just personal
feelings and personal feelings are putting conversation down on to
personal level.

>
> I have also seen individual community members try to single handily
> address problematic behaviors by pointing them out in the hope that by
> doing so, the problematic behaviors would cease.
>
> Each time this occurred, the individual community members gave up in
> frustration. In fact, in a most recent incident, the individual
> community member characterized the remedial exercise as 'rolling a
> large rock up the hill".

There is nothing like that sentence I can find at the moment, so dunno
what you are talking about. What incident??

> As a community, we shouldn't expect each individual community member
> to have to fight this battle themselves, rather I think it should be
> done collectively. The adoption of a sensible CoC helps to achieve that.

It is your problem that you see yourself as being waging a battle
instead of working with others.

>
> I am sure what everyone wants here is a supportive and inclusive work
> environment where collectively we can do some really neat things.
>
> But if the work environment is hostile or dysfunctional, and we as a
> community ignore the issues by allowing the behavioral problems to
> continue without any collective action, then it seems to me we are
> effectively telling the community:

Only dysfunctional behavioral problem I see here, is trying to subdue
all community to minority rule for no apparent reason.
And problem not looking at the text that has issues, but just talking
about it indefinitely...

> "Yes, we have some problems, just try ignore them the best you can and
> not become discouraged and leave as a result of them".

Actually not talking about any exact issue nor a problem, but trying to
solve any future issue, only with governing? How solving everything with
governing is called?

> Frankly I get enough of that in my day job. And I don't feel I should
> have to deal with it while volunteering for an open source project.
>
> In light of this, it's pretty clear we're not going to please everyone
> no matter what direction the project takes. The community may loose
> members either way.

So don't try to replicate your own problems into Openindiana community,
but making problems with dysfunctional operation procedures (secrecy)
and broad sentences bringing more problems.

> Therefore, I see the adoption of a code of conduct as a sensible step
> towards sound project governance, 

It is done in different order to be functional, not rule can be imposed
before creating body that is elected form the people.

It is more important What is inside a document, so actual topic is not
pro et contra,
it is dealing with things in presented text instead.

> which will in the end produce a well managed and supportive work
> environment for all community members.

There is no "magical stick" that will produce that.
There is already very a nice working environment and all benefits and
abilities that can be used to do great things in OI.
It is important to say that it is simply not true that in OI it is hard
to achieve things, at all.
Actually it is easy to achive things, if your 'thing' is for the benefit
ofr the OI.

>
> I do hope you'll reconsider and remain with the community.

Well, I suppose he can do whatever he wants, but painting OI in black
tones, will not help him .

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-21 Thread Piotr Jasiukajtis

I like that, thanks Adam.

--
Piotr Jasiukajtis

> On Jul 18, 2016, at 11:35 PM, Adam Števko  wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> As part of a larger effort at providing a more formal governance structure 
> for the OpenIndiana project, I’d like to announce on the behalf of OI 
> developers the adoption of an OpenIndiana Code of Conduct. The draft text for 
> this new document can be found at 
> http://www.openindiana.org/community/code-of-conduct/.
> 
> We would also like to point out this draft document is open to discussion and 
> acceptance by the community.
> Our desire is for the discussion to be civil and for it to center around the 
> verbiage of the Code of Conduct.
> We do not wish for the discussion to go off topic, or question the need for 
> such a document.
> 
> Please compose your thoughts and comment with as few replies as necessary so 
> the community may solidify the final text of this document.
> 
> Cheers,
> Adam
> ___
> oi-dev mailing list
> oi-dev@openindiana.org
> http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

On 07/21/16 02:31 AM, Michael Kruger wrote:
>
>
> Just as the formulation of a mission statement, road map, and a core
> governance team help to show the community and world we aren't just
> aimlessly trudging on in some unknown direction, the CoC is simply
> another tool to provide structure and governance to the project. It's
> goal is to help unite the community under common goals, aspirations,
> and in this particular case, 'working conditions'.

Take a look at provided evolved text here:
http://wiki.openindiana.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=31391953
http://wiki.openindiana.org/pages/diffpagesbyversion.action?pageId=31391953=5=1

Openindiana Core Principles and Expectations - CPE (CoC) is not statue
nor it's role is to provide 'structure and governance'. Not everything
rotates over power. At the end of the day, people can be asked, and
politely, to think in a certain way, can not be forced into it.

Governance and power should not be the issue in a working community,
only dysfunctional elements need power and see power as important thing,
chasing new rules as a vessel to achieving power as a goal and not
something else.

It is symptomatic that injecting false and bad and broad rules into
community, and actually not talking about rules text themselves, nor
discussing them, can not be looked at as positive behavior, but as
intentionally dragging all things along, without actual interest on
benefits of them but power to begin with.

Rules in a community as stated should not rotate over excluding people,
but over better ways of including them, facilitating growth, not
destruction, and that is more important then policing any possibly 'bad'
one, with all problems related to actually enforcing power over people.
Proposed "not tolerated" part, being wide and easy to misuse, with
"cutting down" narrow-looking principle can't work in present state of OI.

Maybe most important things I would liek to point out are:
- Putting things on site without discussing it first is bad behavior
- Misusing public opinion without making sure it is not rigged (poll) is
a bad behaviour.
- Activating "Core principles and expectations"/"CoC" without previously
having governing body is not possible.
- Having governing body without firstly having named active community
members to elect it, is not possible.
Having poisonous rules is worst thing that could happen to one community.
It is better to avoid future problems then to make a new ones instead.

Why these parts are bad and unacceptable by themselves:

> What will not be tolerated:

Section name imposes that there are those who are asked to police others
and are in the position to segregate people into those those tolerated
or not. It is there as said to induce "fear and strength" into bystander
and not to provide positive look into community.

> Open hostility, and or abusive language.

These terms are so broad that they are easily misused. Open hostility
can't be defined as and exact term (toward what, how to recognize it
opens pandora's box of misinterpretations.
"Abusive language" also means nothing at all, because any language
people use, if it is on topic and can explain what people want to say is
acceptble in widest terms. Not everyone express their thoughts in the
sam manner, maybe sometimes, someone swear or something, but not being
able to identify exactly what this sentence is about, does help not
seeng it is useless.

> Repeated complaining (rehashing) of closed (decided) issues.

This again opens presumption that there is some "higher being" knowing
everything at any time and that "complaining" is a problem.
Subset of complaining is a bug reporting. Or subset of bug reporting is
complaining. If one enters same problem or a bug day after day, and
others enter the same problem it is only positive to hear complaining.

What are closed issues? In a working community there is no putting
things under carpet. Again, calling that omnipotent power who by itself
knows what issues should be closed and what issues should be not? Again
it imposes ruling one against everyone else who "decides" and carve
things into stone, when exact opposite is needed, to be flexible and
evolving.

> Participants who disrupt the collaborative space, 

Again not defining anything, but entering more broad things like "you
have spit on the sidewalk, you are disrupting collaborative space" or
"you dont' wear pink unicorn t-shirt like everyone else, you disrupt
collaborative space", "you post too much messages/code/text/ideas, you
disrupt collaborative space" and so on..
Please DO disrupt collaborative space at all times, by being active and
sharing with people.

> or participate in a pattern of behavior which could be considered
> harassment.

Again, loose terms meaning nothing: "you posted same sentence twice. you
posted same sentence twice " - you have pattern behaviour, on the
cross/fire with him/her!
"Consider harassment" is again not only broad but also very bad to
include,

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-20 Thread Johan S via oi-dev

On Wed, 20 Jul 2016 22:08:54 -0400
Michael Kruger  wrote:

Hi Michael,

> 
> I do hope you'll reconsider and remain with the community.

I will remain ...
My contributions however will change as no one on earth needs PPC/Mips distcc 
farm
i ll stick to polaris with personnal changes for those architectures
I ll keep reporting to HCL what hardware runs OI  
Best regards
Johan

-- 
Johan S 

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-20 Thread Michael Kruger


On 07/20/2016 06:13 PM, Adam Števko wrote:




What is the desired outcome of a code of conduct? Should it be a set of rules? 
Or a set of expectations from each other? Is it assumed to be the same for all 
codes of conducts? If so should we link to that definition? or do we need to 
define that?


The whole idea behind the code of conduct is to show the community and the 
outside world that we are a community of people, who don’t tolerate toxic 
people. There are multiple problems with such people, most present in OI:

- community members are unsubscribing from the list - there has been too much 
drama in the past few months and it needs to be stopped. Nobody wants to deal 
with toxic people. You could see one example right in this email thread.
- public debates - many things are debated in the private because people want 
to work on the project and have something done. If you send out an email to 
oi-dev mailing list, the email is quickly going to hijacked or made off-topic. 
Who has the energy to deal with it every time?

With CoC in place, we can simply show the potential new users and also those, 
who unsubscribed that situation changed and that we mean it seriously. After 
all, everybody wants to have a peaceful and enjoyable time while 
using/developing OI.
However, that can’t be reached while toxic people are present.


I think Adam bring up a very valid point here, which is how OpenSource 
projects in general, and the OpenIndiana community in particular, are 
not immune from the problems posed by difficult people.


Earlier in this thread Alan Coopersmith provided several links which 
help illustrate the problem.


Here is a quote from one of those links:

"The term poisonous person is a nasty label and automatically creates a 
dividing line between “us” (the good guys) and “them” (those nasty 
jerks). There’s a better way to think about the problem. Instead of 
running your team as an elite fraternity with a mission to repel mean 
people, it’s healthier to create a culture that simply refuses to 
tolerate certain negative behaviors. It’s the behaviors you want to 
filter out, not particular individuals. It’s naïve to think of 
individuals as purely good or bad; it’s more constructive and practical 
to identify and reprimand the intolerable behaviors."


I think this statement lends some credibility to the idea of composing a 
list of behaviors which will not (or at least should not) be tolerated 
by the community.


We all know what kinds of behaviors are problematic and sap the life and 
energy out of the community and its members. So composing a list of 
them, shouldn't become an insurmountable task, endlessly debated until 
the cows come home. If that's what it ends up becoming, then the project 
itself is dysfunctional and has much bigger problems than just the 
inability to agree upon a Code of Conduct.


While I don't think anyone wants to see the project suffer an 
existential crisis over this exercise, I do think adopting a CoC is 
taking a rational step in the right direction.


Just as the formulation of a mission statement, road map, and a core 
governance team help to show the community and world we aren't just 
aimlessly trudging on in some unknown direction, the CoC is simply 
another tool to provide structure and governance to the project. It's 
goal is to help unite the community under common goals, aspirations, and 
in this particular case, 'working conditions'.


Michael





___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-20 Thread Nikola M

On 07/21/16 12:13 AM, Adam Števko wrote:
> Hi Till, > >> On Jul 20, 2016, at 10:04 AM, Till Wegmüller
 wrote: >> >> On 18.07.2016 23:35, Adam Števko
wrote: >>> >>> Please compose your thoughts and comment with as few
replies as >>> necessary so the community may solidify the final text of
this document. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Adam >>> >> >> Hi Adam, Hi Nikola >>
>> Thanks both of you for the work put into this. >> >> Here are my
thought and comments: >> When reading Adams text it refers to a body of
Leadership. Both source Projects (FreeBSD and FiFo) have such a Role
defined. Do we have that? > > Not anything official right now. Every
decision was made by one of the contributors and we tried to reach a
consensus. If the decision was too important, project contributors
consulted those topics with various people and tried to do their best.
However, most things were mostly technical and not political. Unless
leader steps up or different governing body is found, there isn’t
anything. The deciding comes as a part of moving the project forward.

Deciding comes from the public, not private sessions.

> > > I have also discussed this topic with Alexander today and we both
concluded that we has just killed the time with it. We are small
developer community, (mostly) nice to each other and try to help. I also
think that every contributor has found his place within a project
already. If any proposal came from me, I’d just make the present
situation official, but there are certainly drawbacks to it.

If you can't figure it out, then let other people do it. It is not
expected from two of you to figure out everything, just accept not
everyone is good at everything.

> > >> Adams text is more worded towards being a set of rules. Nikolas
more in the sense of expectations. I prefer expectations. > > Problem
with expectations in Nikola’s list is that majority of them are already
in practice and the situation is out of hands.

What situation??

> > >> When I read the words "will not be tolerated" it imediatly raises
the question what will hapen if i break those? Who punshes and how? In
my opinion "Discouraged behaviour" is the better wording. > > The point
of using “strong” words is to show that we take it seriously.

Rules can't be broken if they are written in such way that no one
actually understand what they represent and that is the whole "Not
tolerated" section is alike.
Let "Not tolerated" section be not tolerated itself, fully.

> If rules are broken, the situation is going to be handled privately to avoid 
> any (more) drama on the mailing list and ensure that the problem is solved. 
> And who punishes? The CoC states that distribution maintainers are the one to 
> do so. We can change it as it is a draft. Perhaps, somebody could volunteer. 
> I can assure you that nobody wants to do it and behave like a teacher in the 
> kinder garden. Fortunately, the community hadn’t had to solve any serious 
> issues and there weren’t any > The whole idea behind the code of conduct is 
> to show the community
and the outside world that we are a community of people, who don’t
tolerate toxic people. There are multiple problems with such people,
most present in OI: > > - community members are unsubscribing from the
list - there has been too much drama in the past few months and it needs
to be stopped. Nobody wants to deal with toxic people. You could see one
example right in this email thread. > - public debates - many things are
debated in the private because people want to work on the project and
have something done. If you send out an email to oi-dev mailing list,
the email is quickly going to hijacked or made off-topic. Who has the
energy to deal with it every time? > > With CoC in place, we can simply
show the potential new users and also those, who unsubscribed that
situation changed and that we mean it seriously. After all, everybody
wants to have a peaceful and enjoyable time while using/developing OI. >
However, that can’t be reached while toxic people are present. > >
Cheers, > Adam

I think that by calling people toxic it is what is making toxic environment.
Adam, please stop saying bad words about people in general on this list..

OI is inclusive community as defined when created.
Making it exclusive, totalitarian, ruled by the iron fist is what can
not be defendable by any means.

If we are living in 1984 novel world, I would consider such anti human
look at the things, but we do not.
Inventing "enemies" even if there are none is cold-war type of
thinking.  Warning on results of oppression is not.

We are on the verge of the cliff here, where publicly speaking is
considered not needed and discussing is considered negative and doing
things secretly, policing and giving people sense of fear should not be
the norm.

Someone wanting to lead, should not oppress.


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-20 Thread Adam Števko

Hi Till,

> On Jul 20, 2016, at 10:04 AM, Till Wegmüller  wrote:
> 
> On 18.07.2016 23:35, Adam Števko wrote:
>> 
>> Please compose your thoughts and comment with as few replies as
>> necessary so the community may solidify the final text of this document.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Adam
>> 
> 
> Hi Adam, Hi Nikola
> 
> Thanks both of you for the work put into this.
> 
> Here are my thought and comments:
> When reading Adams text it refers to a body of Leadership. Both source 
> Projects (FreeBSD and FiFo) have such a Role defined. Do we have that?

Not anything official right now. Every decision was made by one of the 
contributors and we tried to reach a consensus. If the decision was too 
important, project contributors consulted those topics with various people and 
tried to do their best. However, most things were mostly technical and not 
political. Unless leader steps up or different governing body is found, there 
isn’t anything. The deciding comes as a part of moving the project forward.

I have also discussed this topic with Alexander today and we both concluded 
that we has just killed the time with it. We are small developer community, 
(mostly) nice to each other and try to help. I also think that every 
contributor has found his place within a project already. If any proposal came 
from me, I’d just make the present situation official, but there are certainly 
drawbacks to it.

> Adams text is more worded towards being a set of rules. Nikolas more in the 
> sense of expectations. I prefer expectations.

Problem with expectations in Nikola’s list is that majority of them are already 
in practice and the situation is out of hands.

> When I read the words "will not be tolerated" it imediatly raises the 
> question what will hapen if i break those? Who punshes and how? In my opinion 
> "Discouraged behaviour" is the better wording.

The point of using “strong” words is to show that we take it seriously. If 
rules are broken, the situation is going to be handled privately to avoid any 
(more) drama on the mailing list and ensure that the problem is solved. And who 
punishes? The CoC states that distribution maintainers are the one to do so. We 
can change it as it is a draft. Perhaps, somebody could volunteer. I can assure 
you that nobody wants to do it and behave like a teacher in the kinder garden. 
Fortunately, the community hadn’t had to solve any serious issues and there 
weren’t any

> I prefer the managing misuse and escalation section over the reporting 
> violations. We have a very friendly community. There should not be a need to 
> involve a third party to resolve issues from the very beginning.
> 
> The very notion of twitter is that everything is public.

Twitter as a medium has private DM and it's rather usual to use it. It just an 
another communication channel. If you insist, we can remove it.

> I find the point "Maintain welcoming environment for new contributors and 
> guide them in contributions." very important. I would like to have that in.

I’ll add it, thanks.

> What is the desired outcome of a code of conduct? Should it be a set of 
> rules? Or a set of expectations from each other? Is it assumed to be the same 
> for all codes of conducts? If so should we link to that definition? or do we 
> need to define that?

The whole idea behind the code of conduct is to show the community and the 
outside world that we are a community of people, who don’t tolerate toxic 
people. There are multiple problems with such people, most present in OI:

- community members are unsubscribing from the list - there has been too much 
drama in the past few months and it needs to be stopped. Nobody wants to deal 
with toxic people. You could see one example right in this email thread.
- public debates - many things are debated in the private because people want 
to work on the project and have something done. If you send out an email to 
oi-dev mailing list, the email is quickly going to hijacked or made off-topic. 
Who has the energy to deal with it every time?

With CoC in place, we can simply show the potential new users and also those, 
who unsubscribed that situation changed and that we mean it seriously. After 
all, everybody wants to have a peaceful and enjoyable time while 
using/developing OI.
However, that can’t be reached while toxic people are present.

Cheers,
Adam

signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-20 Thread Nikola M

On 07/20/16 12:19 PM, Johan S wrote:
>
> and the future will certainly go this way rule #3137 violates rule #2169
> you're right , i fork from now...
Hi,
I would take this as your contribution toward things you like or not.
We (me, you and everyone) are actually, actively changing the future as
we speak :)

Just to mention, private actions are considered not on topic, like
announcing private 'filters' and un/subscriptions is considered disruptive.

Forking is welcome, please inform us how you are advancing with your
fork, where is it hosted and contribute more.

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-20 Thread Johan S via oi-dev

On Wed, 20 Jul 2016 01:44:00 +0200
Nikola M  wrote:

> On 07/19/16 02:26 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:
> >
> >
> > As part of a larger effort at providing a more formal governance
> > structure for the OpenIndiana project, I’d like to announce on the
> > behalf of OI developers the adoption of an OpenIndiana Code of
> > Conduct. The draft text for this new document can be found
> > at http://www.openindiana.org/community/code-of-conduct/.
> >
> >
> > Looks reasonable to me.
> 
> That's because you are not seeing enough in the future.

and the future will certainly go this way rule #3137 violates rule #2169
you're right , i fork from now...
unsubscribe

-- 
Johan S 

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-20 Thread Till Wegmüller


On 18.07.2016 23:35, Adam Števko wrote:


Please compose your thoughts and comment with as few replies as
necessary so the community may solidify the final text of this document.

Cheers,
Adam



Hi Adam, Hi Nikola

Thanks both of you for the work put into this.

Here are my thought and comments:
When reading Adams text it refers to a body of Leadership. Both source 
Projects (FreeBSD and FiFo) have such a Role defined. Do we have that?


Adams text is more worded towards being a set of rules. Nikolas more in 
the sense of expectations. I prefer expectations.


When I read the words "will not be tolerated" it imediatly raises the 
question what will hapen if i break those? Who punishes and how? In my 
opinion "Discouraged behaviour" is the better wording.


I prefer the managing misuse and escalation section over the reporting 
violations. We have a very friendly community. There should not be a 
need to involve a third party to resolve issues from the very beginning.


The very notion of twitter is that everything is public.

I find the point "Maintain welcoming environment for new contributors 
and guide them in contributions." very important. I would like to have 
that in.


What is the desired outcome of a code of conduct? Should it be a set of 
rules? Or a set of expectations from each other? Is it assumed to be the 
same for all codes of conducts? If so should we link to that definition? 
or do we need to define that?



Greetings
Till



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

On 07/19/16 07:15 PM, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
>
>> And actualy 'not be tolerable' is NOT in a sense of OI community.
>
> http://www.plausiblydeniable.com/opinion/gsf.html - see fallacy #1.
> http://www.slideshare.net/dberkholz/assholes-are-killing-your-project
> https://www.safaribooksonline.com/library/view/team-geek/9781449329839/ch04.html
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-F-3E8pyjFo

Links are OK, I 'll take a look at their opinions, thanks.
But links themselves do not contribute to actually changing proposed text.

>
>> I don't know for anyone's inspiration, but it is not needed here to
>> mention
>> direct competition in a way that we are not part of FreeBSD nor ever
>> will be,
>> unless all BSDs accept copyleft licensing/CDDL .
>
> Crediting sources is a cornerstone of open source.  And if you view
> BSD projects
> as competition instead of potential allies, you'll make it harder to
> get other
> projects to support OI - people from different distros often have to
> work together, and in both X11 & GNOME, I've been grateful for
> cooperation with BSD
> maintainers in helping get non-Linux support issues resolved to
> benefit both
> the BSDish and Solarish OS'es.

Yes, but sucking up is not included.

Being independent it most important at least something needs to be
original. not just copied over.


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

On 07/18/16 11:35 PM, Adam Števko wrote:
> Hello,
>
> As part of a larger effort at providing a more formal governance
> structure for the OpenIndiana project, I’d like to announce on the
> behalf of OI developers the adoption of an OpenIndiana Code of
> Conduct. The draft text for this new document can be found
> at http://www.openindiana.org/community/code-of-conduct/.

Hello,
I posted updated revision of  "Openindiana Core Principles and
Expectations - CPE" (Code of Conduct)
on http://wiki.openindiana.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=31391953
(WIP* Openindiana Core Principles and Expectations - CPE (Code of
Conduct) under:
OpenIndiana Community Hub
 >
Getting Involved
 > Website
Ideas   > WIP*
Openindiana Core Principles and Expectations - CPE (Code of Conduct)

It comes from the perspective that it is more important to have positive
attitude and community process in resolving (if any) issues, then
mandate (secretive) police work and vague "language" related descriptions.
It is much more relaxed as a text, providing by itself better
environment for people.
It is also named "Core Principles and Expectations", because we as OI
are not by any means forced to be the same like any other free software
distro.

Please recognize the need that OI Principles/Expectations (CPE/CoC) can
not be made "just like that",
but require forming of Openindiana governing body , that also require
registering named community members etc.
(http://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/Website+Ideas)

I would also like to say that OI website is not a Wiki and that WIP
articles should not be posted on site directly, without review and other
processes.
if you want to make an article please do it on Wiki first, otherwise it
could be seen as pushing it to the site without any civil rules.

Also, (Adam Števko, others) please do NOT cross-post mailing list
messages (e.g. posting both on oi-dev and openindiana-discuss in same
message). It is already explained that is from ML perspective a bit rude
behavior and not very usefull, regarding problems with bounced messages
(on some mail services it gets presented only once so it is not visible
on more then one mailing list and also posting should differentiate the
targeted public).

Here is the updated text (refer to Wiki for newest):
If you have anything to add, change or else, please do comment.

  WIP* Openindiana Core Principles and Expectations - CPE (Code of
  Conduct)

  * Added by Nikola M. ,
last edited by Nikola M.
 on Jul 20, 2016
 (view change

)

This document is not by any means official Openindiana core principles
and expectations (Code of Conduct).  It Serves as a draft for editing
and discussing.
Mandating Code of conduct, requires OI governing body.
OI governing body requires creating it by delegated members of community.
Delegated members of community requires having registered active OI
community members.

Once presented from Openindiana governing body, Openindiana core
principles and expectations (Code of Conduct) can provide community
guidelines, supporting productive, respectful and collaborative
environment for any person contributing to the Openindiana.
Feel free to discuss changes under this mailing list topic:
http://openindiana.org/pipermail/oi-dev/2016-July/thread.html#4504

  **Proposed** Openindiana Core Principles and Expectations - CPE (Code
  of Conduct)

You should use them at the times as the community member, including
community-defined communication channels (Mailing lists, IRC, submitted
patches, commit comments, etc.).

Core principles and expectations for Openindiana contributors and
community members:

  * Respect and appreciate people's work, time, and effort.
  * Tolerate the right to have different views.
  * Recognize that your public actions determine the public perception
of the project.
  * Participate while on topic, with personal remarks being not on topic
at all times.
  * Interpret the words and actions of others, always assuming good
intentions and providing good intentions.
  * Learn from others, be positive and teach others what you have learned.
  * Ask the community for confirmation of your actions and conclusions.
  * Do everything in open, discuss anything.
  * Contribute in all ways you can to make Openindiana better.
  * Maintain welcoming environment for new contributors and guide them
in contributions.

Discouraged behavior :

  * No personal witch hunt, based on anything toward a person(s).
  *

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

On 07/19/16 02:26 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:
>
>
> As part of a larger effort at providing a more formal governance
> structure for the OpenIndiana project, I’d like to announce on the
> behalf of OI developers the adoption of an OpenIndiana Code of
> Conduct. The draft text for this new document can be found
> at http://www.openindiana.org/community/code-of-conduct/.
>
>
> Looks reasonable to me.

That's because you are not seeing enough in the future.


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-19 Thread Alan Coopersmith

On 07/19/16 02:57 AM, Nikola M wrote:

What will not be tolerated:

* Open hostility, and or abusive language.
* Repeated complaining (rehashing) of closed (decided) issues.
* Participants who disrupt the collaborative space, or participate in a
pattern of behavior which could be considered harassment.
* Filibustering – (replying with negative or opposing viewpoints to every
post in a mailing list thread).

This whole 'not tolerated' section is void and made with unprecise language.
It is simply not needed having in mind 'Core principles' section'.
In this state whole section should be deleted.

It is widely recognized that Codes of Conduct for communities need to explicitly
state what behavior is not allowed to make sure everyone has the same
understanding.

https://adainitiative.org/2014/02/18/howto-design-a-code-of-conduct-for-your-community/
https://gigaom.com/2014/10/25/why-companies-that-rely-on-open-source-projects-must-insist-on-a-strong-enforceable-code-of-conduct/

And actualy 'not be tolerable' is NOT in a sense of OI community.

http://www.plausiblydeniable.com/opinion/gsf.html - see fallacy #1.
http://www.slideshare.net/dberkholz/assholes-are-killing-your-project
https://www.safaribooksonline.com/library/view/team-geek/9781449329839/ch04.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-F-3E8pyjFo

* Adopted from the Project-FiFo Code of Conduct
.
* Further inspiration derived from the FreeBSD Code of Conduct
.

I don't know for anyone's inspiration, but it is not needed here to mention
direct competition in a way that we are not part of FreeBSD nor ever will be,
unless all BSDs accept copyleft licensing/CDDL .

Crediting sources is a cornerstone of open source. And if you view BSD projects
as competition instead of potential allies, you'll make it harder to get other
projects to support OI - people from different distros often have to work
together, and in both X11 & GNOME, I've been grateful for cooperation with BSD

maintainers in helping get non-Linux support issues resolved to benefit both
the BSDish and Solarish OS'es.

-alan-

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-19 Thread Alexander Pyhalov


Adam Števko писал 19.07.2016 00:35:

Hello,

As part of a larger effort at providing a more formal governance
structure for the OpenIndiana project, I’d like to announce on the
behalf of OI developers the adoption of an OpenIndiana Code of
Conduct. The draft text for this new document can be found at
http://www.openindiana.org/community/code-of-conduct/
.


LGTM. The only issue I see is that perhaps "maintainers" should be 
reworded,

perhaps "distribution maintainers" or in some other way.

---
System Administrator of Southern Federal University Computer Center

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-19 Thread Bob Friesenhahn


On Mon, 18 Jul 2016, Adam Števko wrote:


Hello,

As part of a larger effort at providing a more formal governance structure for the 
OpenIndiana project, I’d like to announce on the behalf of OI developers the adoption 
of an OpenIndiana Code of Conduct. The draft text for this new document can be found 
at http://www.openindiana.org/community/code-of-conduct/ 
.

We would also like to point out this draft document is open to discussion and 
acceptance by the community.
Our desire is for the discussion to be civil and for it to center around the 
verbiage of the Code of Conduct.
We do not wish for the discussion to go off topic, or question the need for 
such a document.

Please compose your thoughts and comment with as few replies as necessary so 
the community may solidify the final text of this document.


This looks really good to me except that there needs to be some 
definition of 'We' somewhere (perhaps elsewhere on the site) as well 
as some identification of who will decide what is not tolerated and 
who will enact enforcement actions.


Bob
--
Bob Friesenhahn
bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
GraphicsMagick Maintainer,http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-19 Thread Glenn Holmer

On 07/18/2016 04:35 PM, Adam Števko wrote:
> As part of a larger effort at providing a more formal governance
> structure for the OpenIndiana project, I’d like to announce on the
> behalf of OI developers the adoption of an OpenIndiana Code of Conduct.
> The draft text for this new document can be found
> at http://www.openindiana.org/community/code-of-conduct/.

A good idea, and well written. I think it's fine as it stands.

-- 
Glenn Holmer (Linux registered user #16682)
"After the vintage season came the aftermath -- and Cenbe."

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

2016-07-19 Thread Aurélien Larcher

> As part of a larger effort at providing a more formal governance structure
> for the OpenIndiana project, I’d like to announce on the behalf of OI
> developers the adoption of an OpenIndiana Code of Conduct. The draft text
> for this new document can be found at
> http://www.openindiana.org/community/code-of-conduct/.
>

Looks reasonable to me.
Thank you.

Aurélien



>
> We would also like to point out this draft document is open to discussion
> and acceptance by the community.
> Our desire is for the discussion to be civil and for it to center around
> the verbiage of the Code of Conduct.
> We do not wish for the discussion to go off topic, or question the need
> for such a document.
>
> Please compose your thoughts and comment with as few replies as necessary
> so the community may solidify the final text of this document.
>
> Cheers,
> Adam
>
> ___
> oi-dev mailing list
> oi-dev@openindiana.org
> http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
>



-- 
---
Praise the Caffeine embeddings
___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct