Re: [python-committers] Making the PSF CoC apply to core developers

2016-02-28 Thread Brett Cannon 
On Sat, 27 Feb 2016 at 18:33 Steven D'Aprano  wrote:

> On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 05:17:50PM +, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
> [...]
> > After a rather rude email on python-dev
>
> I haven't noticed this email. Care to link to it? We should be allowed
> to see what sort of behaviour is likely to treated as officially
> unacceptable in the future.
>

https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2016-February/143417.html is
the key email (there were two before it where tensions started to rise; you
can see my public response later in that thread.


>
> I think this is actually a very important point. I've seen forums and
> discussion groups where the enforcement of faux-politeness and "being
> friendly and positive" and "no jerks allowed" makes the place extremely
> hostile to anyone who doesn't follow the majority opinion.


I have never seen this happen in the Python community.


> Where even
> polite disagreement is seen as "being a jerk".


That would go against the very first part of the PSF CoC about being open.


> Since rudeness is so
> subjective, formal prohibitions on being "rude" is a potent weapon for
> groups to hijack a community by labelling anything and anyone they don't
> like as "rude". So I think it is important for us to know what you
> consider is rude enough to require a CoC.
>


>
>
> [...]
> > When people know they are expected to behave in a
> > civil manner and others know they are allowed to call someone out for
> being
> > uncivil it typically is enough to make people behave.
>
> You don't need a CoC for that. Social expectations apply even without a
> formal set of rules.
>

That is not the experience I've had on python-ideas. Since I implemented
the CoC over there I think the discourse has cleaned up a good amount.


>
>
> > So there is no issue of people "being overburdened by regulations". The
> CoC
> > only comes up when someone is being so rude that they need to be talked
> to
> > about their attitude  problem,
>
> Who judges that point?


Just like any other point discussed here; either we reach consensus as a
group or Guido makes a final call.


> Can *anyone* take it upon themselves to (let's
> say) say "Brett, you unilaterally changed the policy with no discussion
> or consultation and just four minutes notice. That is unspeakably rude
> and total jerk behaviour, so under your own rules you're out of here"?
>
> I'm not just making a rhetorical point. I wouldn't accept that sort of
> unilateral behaviour from my work colleagues.


It wasn't a unilateral decision. If it was then I would have just done it
without  opening an issue or bringing it up here. I mentioned it here just
in case someone might get upset by it (which obviously happened).


> It is pushy and obnoxious
> and breeds resentment and is exactly the sort of reason why some people
> are deeply suspicious of CoCs. And when it happens on a Friday night,
> when people are likely to be away from their computers...
>
> http://politicaldictionary.com/words/friday-news-dump/


It happened Friday night because that's when I read the email on python-dev
that triggered me to go through all the mailing lists I manage and make
sure they mention the PSF CoC applies there.  There was no purposeful trick
to try and sneak this through (if I was trying to sneak it in then I did a
bad job by bringing this up here and/or not just committing the update
immediately). I'm not sure how you manage your Python contribution time,
but for me I don't have as much as I like and so I seize on it when I can
and I don't pay attention to what day of the week it is.


>
>
> My employer learned the hard lesson that even "self-evidently and
> obviously correct" policy changes need a consultation period before
> making official. No single manager can be allowed to make unilateral
> policy changes for the entire group without giving the other relevant
> managers time to respond. Python is over 20 years old and the core devs
> have managed without a CoC for all that time.


I'm quite aware of that having been a core dev for 13 of those years. But
that doesn't mean we can't improve the situation. And this is more about
giving people outside of the core dev group piece of mind than it is about
explicitly worrying about a core dev violating the CoC. I do not want
people thinking we are above reproach, and so I thought it would be good to
publicly state that we are not and we hold ourselves to the same standards
we expect everyone to follow at every major Python conference, on mailing
lists, etc. when it involves us representing Python and the other core devs
on this list.


> You could have, should
> have, waited a few days before seemingly ramming this policy change in
> behind people's backs.
>

Steven, I didn't try to sneak this past anyone. I honestly didn't expect it
to be that controversial at this point which is why the email is almost
nonchalant in saying that I viewed posting here as a technicality. I
seriously thought we as a community were pas

Re: [python-committers] Making the PSF CoC apply to core developers

2016-02-28 Thread Georg Brandl 
On 02/28/2016 08:10 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:

> Can *anyone* take it upon themselves to (let's
> say) say "Brett, you unilaterally changed the policy with no discussion
> or consultation and just four minutes notice. That is unspeakably rude
> and total jerk behaviour, so under your own rules you're out of here"?
> 
> I'm not just making a rhetorical point. I wouldn't accept that sort of
> unilateral behaviour from my work colleagues.
> 
> 
> It wasn't a unilateral decision. If it was then I would have just done it
> without  opening an issue or bringing it up here. I mentioned it here just in
> case someone might get upset by it (which obviously happened).

FWIW, Eric Smith and myself (co-"owners" of the mailing list) supported this
when Brett asked.

I hope, Steven, you're by now convinced that this wasn't a cloak-and-dagger
operation (really, for volunteer work there is no such thing as "business
hours").

Neither is it a unique thing for a python.org mailing list. This is especially
important: what is so different about python-ideas that it needs the CoC,
while -committers doesn't?  Much better to be consistent and to have the same
standards applied to every list (eventually).

cheers,
Georg

___
python-committers mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Re: [python-committers] Making the PSF CoC apply to core developers

2016-02-28 Thread Victor Stinner 
Hi,

2016-02-26 20:29 GMT+01:00 Brett Cannon :
> I noticed that the devguide didn't explicitly mention that core developers
> were expected to follow the PSF CoC
> (https://docs.python.org/devguide/coredev.html and
> https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/, respectively). I have opened
> http://bugs.python.org/issue26446 to make sure it gets documented.
>
> Since this is technically a modification of the requirements of getting
> commit privileges I wanted to mention it here before I (or anyone else) made
> the change.

I'm fine with this change. Especially core developers must respect the
CoC, give the example ;-)

Victor
___
python-committers mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Re: [python-committers] Making the PSF CoC apply to core developers

2016-02-28 Thread Brett Cannon 
On Sun, Feb 28, 2016, 12:02 Georg Brandl  wrote:

> On 02/28/2016 08:10 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
> > Can *anyone* take it upon themselves to (let's
> > say) say "Brett, you unilaterally changed the policy with no
> discussion
> > or consultation and just four minutes notice. That is unspeakably
> rude
> > and total jerk behaviour, so under your own rules you're out of
> here"?
> >
> > I'm not just making a rhetorical point. I wouldn't accept that sort
> of
> > unilateral behaviour from my work colleagues.
> >
> >
> > It wasn't a unilateral decision. If it was then I would have just done it
> > without  opening an issue or bringing it up here. I mentioned it here
> just in
> > case someone might get upset by it (which obviously happened).
>
> FWIW, Eric Smith and myself (co-"owners" of the mailing list) supported
> this
> when Brett asked.
>

I think Steven's objection was me wanting to state in the devguide that
core devs would adhere to the CoC in all Python-related interactions in the
community regardless of whether that interaction explicitly occurred under
the purview of the CoC, which is a stronger statement than just this
mailing list being under the CoC.

-Brett


> I hope, Steven, you're by now convinced that this wasn't a cloak-and-dagger
> operation (really, for volunteer work there is no such thing as "business
> hours").
>
> Neither is it a unique thing for a python.org mailing list. This is
> especially
> important: what is so different about python-ideas that it needs the CoC,
> while -committers doesn't?  Much better to be consistent and to have the
> same
> standards applied to every list (eventually).
>
> cheers,
> Georg
>
> ___
> python-committers mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
> Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>
___
python-committers mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Re: [python-committers] Making the PSF CoC apply to core developers

2016-02-28 Thread Terry Reedy 

On 2/28/2016 3:56 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:

Hi,

2016-02-26 20:29 GMT+01:00 Brett Cannon :

I noticed that the devguide didn't explicitly mention that core developers
were expected to follow the PSF CoC
(https://docs.python.org/devguide/coredev.html and
https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/, respectively). I have opened
http://bugs.python.org/issue26446 to make sure it gets documented.

Since this is technically a modification of the requirements of getting
commit privileges I wanted to mention it here before I (or anyone else) made
the change.


I'm fine with this change. Especially core developers must respect the
CoC, give the example ;-)


+1, for reasons of other examples.

tjr


___
python-committers mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Re: [python-committers] Making the PSF CoC apply to core developers

2016-02-28 Thread Ethan Furman 

On 02/28/2016 11:10 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:


I swear that I did not mean to pull a fast one or somehow exert some
influence to make this happen on the sly and I'm sorry if you thought
that; I seriously thought it wasn't going to be an issue. But since it
is for  some I promise I won't make any change to the devguide unless
clear consensus can be reached or Guido tells me to flat-out (just like
any other change that affects Python).


+1 for CoC.  Better to have expectations written down so nobody has to 
guess.


--
~Ethan~

___
python-committers mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Re: [python-committers] Making the PSF CoC apply to core developers

2016-02-28 Thread Georg Brandl 
On 02/28/2016 10:25 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
> 
> 
> On Sun, Feb 28, 2016, 12:02 Georg Brandl  > wrote:
> 
> On 02/28/2016 08:10 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
> 
> > Can *anyone* take it upon themselves to (let's
> > say) say "Brett, you unilaterally changed the policy with no 
> discussion
> > or consultation and just four minutes notice. That is unspeakably 
> rude
> > and total jerk behaviour, so under your own rules you're out of 
> here"?
> >
> > I'm not just making a rhetorical point. I wouldn't accept that sort 
> of
> > unilateral behaviour from my work colleagues.
> >
> >
> > It wasn't a unilateral decision. If it was then I would have just done 
> it
> > without  opening an issue or bringing it up here. I mentioned it here 
> just in
> > case someone might get upset by it (which obviously happened).
> 
> FWIW, Eric Smith and myself (co-"owners" of the mailing list) supported 
> this
> when Brett asked.
> 
> 
> I think Steven's objection was me wanting to state in the devguide that core
> devs would adhere to the CoC in all Python-related interactions in the 
> community
> regardless of whether that interaction explicitly occurred under the purview 
> of
> the CoC, which is a stronger statement than just this mailing list being under
> the CoC.

Well, "Python-related" is a bit strong and includes activities the PSF/the
CPython developer community has no business in. It should be rephrased to
"Python core-related" - that mostly happens through the mailing lists (and
the tracker).  We should not presume to be an employer that will fire
employees based on a post on their private Facebook account.

cheers,
Georg

___
python-committers mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/