Re: [Wikitech-l] Can/should my extensions be deleted from the Wikimedia Git repository?

[Sam Wilson]

I think the point about 'ownership' of extension repos is an interesting 
one: certainly Wikimedia-hosted projects do differ from other popular 
FOSS projects in that there's far more collaboration on e.g. extensions 
than is perhaps common elsewhere. For example, if you have a WordPress 
or Dokuwiki repo it's basically yours to do with what you will, in that 
no one is going to come and merge code that you've not okayed (obviously 
there's a requirement for checking for random weird non-project or spam 
stuff, but we're just talking about bonafide contributions).


There are some things that no one minds being committed by other 
developers — most projects have some system of l10n messages being 
incorporated easily, for example. And MediaWiki extensions now have the 
great libraryupgrader which is in a similar vein (although I admit the 
first time it ran on an extension I maintain I tried to revert it!).


But what I think we lack is particularly clear guidance for new 
maintainers, who may come with experience of other projects where 
they've had more autonomy, and for whom some random person committing 
files will come as a shock. It'd be nice to just say "hey, now you're a 
maintainer, you can expect others to help out and sometimes do things to 
this code without waiting for your consent". I don't really think having 
+2 rights is the same as being a "maintainer", and people with the 
former should defer to the latter in most situations.


(Of course, advertising community norms is sort of what the Code of 
Conduct file is there for! But I'm not really talking just about that, 
but about the general idea that Yaron raised about when one can expect 
others to change one's codebase. Maybe the CONTRIBUTING.md file should 
exist too.)


— Sam.

___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Can/should my extensions be deleted from the Wikimedia Git repository?

[Federico Leva (Nemo)]

To directly answer the question in the subject: of course Yaron's 
extensions should stay in gerrit.wikimedia.org, without the file in 
question.


We want MediaWiki's main development spaces to be inclusive and able to 
bring developers together. I think we all agree that it's a loss if more 
repositories end up being scattered on third party git servers.


Meddling with the content of repositories we host by forcing 
Wikimedia-specific content is not responsible. For one, it makes it 
impossible to multi-host a repository if such Wikimedia-specific content 
is incompatible with the requirements of other hosts.


Federico

___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Can/should my extensions be deleted from the Wikimedia Git repository?

[Nischay Nahata]

 I think that advertising the COC might still have been in "good faith",
though it should have been done with a mail to the project owners.

But what I find very objecting is the way the two developers have
communicated on the gerrit thread. Both Antoine and Chad (both senior devs
that we used to look up to) behaved in a rather dictatorish manner which is
not even seen around profit making companies. Neither cared to explain and
discuss on the issue, while Yaron was trying his best to.


Regards,
Nischay Nahata


On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 9:49 AM MZMcBride  wrote:

> Yaron Koren wrote:
> >That's how it went until two days ago, when Antoine Musso submitted a
> >patch for my Site Settings extension (I don't know why that one
> >specifically), re-adding the file. I rejected the patch, on the same
> >grounds as before, but another developer, Chad Horohoe, overrode me and
> >merged it in. That led to a discussion featuring Antoine, Chad, a few
> >other WMF developers, and me, which you can find here:
> >
> >https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/437555/
> >
> >Some of the (unbelievable) highlights:
> >
> >- From Antoine: "Well then can we just archive this repository please?"
> >
> >- From Chad: "Yeah no that's not how it works. If it's being hosted on
> >gerrit.wikimedia.org, it needs a CoC file. If you object to that, you can
> >find hosting elsewhere."
>
> It was really inappropriate for Chad to hastily and forcefully merge this
> change.
>
> MZMcBride
>
>
>
> ___
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

[Wikitech-l] Clarification Re: [nominations needed] Wikimedia Technical Conference

[Greg Grossmeier]

Hello,

The Wikimedia Technical Conference Program Committee wanted to send a
clarifying note regarding the nomination process.

Initially we said that relevant budget owners will be invited directly
by us and thus *do not need to be explicitly nominated*. This is still
half true.

We will be directly inviting many budget owners BUT please do nominate
those budget owners that you believe should be in attendance (including
yourself, if applicable). Do this even if you believe we will already
select them. There's no harm in nominating someone.

I have updated the FAQ accordingly[0].

Please post any questions on the talk page[1].

Thanks,

Greg

[0] 
https://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Technical_Conference%2F2018%2FFAQ=revision=2801232=2801090
[1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Technical_Conference/2018

-- 
| Greg GrossmeierGPG: B2FA 27B1 F7EB D327 6B8E |
| Release Team ManagerA18D 1138 8E47 FAC8 1C7D |

___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Can/should my extensions be deleted from the Wikimedia Git repository?

[MZMcBride]

Yaron Koren wrote:
>That's how it went until two days ago, when Antoine Musso submitted a
>patch for my Site Settings extension (I don't know why that one
>specifically), re-adding the file. I rejected the patch, on the same
>grounds as before, but another developer, Chad Horohoe, overrode me and
>merged it in. That led to a discussion featuring Antoine, Chad, a few
>other WMF developers, and me, which you can find here:
>
>https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/437555/
>
>Some of the (unbelievable) highlights:
>
>- From Antoine: "Well then can we just archive this repository please?"
>
>- From Chad: "Yeah no that's not how it works. If it's being hosted on
>gerrit.wikimedia.org, it needs a CoC file. If you object to that, you can
>find hosting elsewhere."

It was really inappropriate for Chad to hastily and forcefully merge this
change.

MZMcBride



___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

[Wikitech-l] TechCom Radar 2018-06-06

[Kate Chapman]

Hi All,

Here are the minutes from this week's TechCom meeting:

* Call for nominations to join TechCom is ongoing (closes 18 June)


* Held public IRC discussion on the future of rev_parent_id:

    * log:

    * minutes:


* Began discussion of Deploy JADE extension to production (will bring up
again in a later meeting) 

* No public IRC RFC meeting next week

You can also find our meeting minutes at


See also the TechCom RFC board
.

-- 

Kate Chapman
TechCom Facilitator (Contractor)




___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Can/should my extensions be deleted from the Wikimedia Git repository?

[John]

*It's a reasonable ask to have the file there *Correct, its reasonable to
ask. Forcing it down peoples throats and cluttering 830+ repos with the
same file is not. Why not have it in the primary mediawiki directory and
note that it covers all sub-projects? Threatening users and telling users
that disagrees with your position about a file requirement not in the CoC
is flat out intimidation. Instead of saying *Maybe this should be brought
up for discussion *users are now defending and threatening users who
questioned them. Just leaves a sour taste in my mouth. Feel free to
continue to personally attack those who you disagree with, instead of the
subject mater. Whatever


On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 8:48 PM, Ryan Lane  wrote:

> The most likely way for people to see codes of conduct is through
> repositories, which lets them know they have some way to combat harassment
> in the tool they're using to try to contribute to a particular repository.
> It makes sense to have a CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md in the repos; however, if all
> the repos are using the same policy, it's often better to have a minimal
> CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md that simply says "This repo is governed by the blah blah
> code of conduct, specified here: ". This makes it possible to have a
> single boilerplate code of conduct without needing to update every repo
> whenever the CoC changes.
>
> It's a reasonable ask to have the file there, and this discussion feels
> like a thinly veiled argument against CoCs as a whole. If you're so against
> the md file, or against the CoC as a whole, github and/or gitlab are fine
> places to host a repository.
>
> On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 5:39 PM, John  wrote:
>
> > Honestly I find forcing documentation into repos to be abrasive, and
> > overstepping the bounds of the CoC.I also find the behavior of those
> > pushing such an approach to be hostile and overly aggressive. Why do you
> > need to force a copy of the CoC into every repo? Why not keep it in a
> > central location? What kind of mess would you need to cleanup if for some
> > reason you needed to adjust the contents of that file? Instead of having
> > one location to update you now have 800+ copies that need fixed.
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 8:23 PM, Yaron Koren  wrote:
> >
> > >  Chris Koerner  wrote:
> > > > “Please just assume for the sake of this discussion that (a) I'm
> > willing
> > > > to abide by the rules of the Code of Conduct, and (b) I don't want
> the
> > > > CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md file in my extensions.”
> > > > Ok, hear me out here. What if I told you those two things are
> > > > incompatible? That abiding by the community agreements requires the
> > file
> > > > as an explicit declaration of said agreement. That is to say, if we
> had
> > > > a discussion about amending the CoC to be explicit about this
> > expectation
> > > > you wouldn’t have issues with including it? Or at least you’d be OK
> > with
> > > > it?
> > >
> > > Brian is right that adding a requirement to include this file to the
> CoC
> > > would be an odd move. But, if it did happen, I don't know - I suppose
> I'd
> > > have two choices: either include the files or remove my code. I would
> be
> > an
> > > improvement over the current situation in at least one way: we would
> know
> > > that rules are still created in an orderly, consensus-like way, as
> > opposed
> > > to now, where a small group of developers can apparently make up rules
> as
> > > they go along.
> > >
> > > -Yaron
> > > ___
> > > Wikitech-l mailing list
> > > Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
> > >
> > ___
> > Wikitech-l mailing list
> > Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
> >
> ___
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Can/should my extensions be deleted from the Wikimedia Git repository?

[Ryan Lane]

The most likely way for people to see codes of conduct is through
repositories, which lets them know they have some way to combat harassment
in the tool they're using to try to contribute to a particular repository.
It makes sense to have a CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md in the repos; however, if all
the repos are using the same policy, it's often better to have a minimal
CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md that simply says "This repo is governed by the blah blah
code of conduct, specified here: ". This makes it possible to have a
single boilerplate code of conduct without needing to update every repo
whenever the CoC changes.

It's a reasonable ask to have the file there, and this discussion feels
like a thinly veiled argument against CoCs as a whole. If you're so against
the md file, or against the CoC as a whole, github and/or gitlab are fine
places to host a repository.

On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 5:39 PM, John  wrote:

> Honestly I find forcing documentation into repos to be abrasive, and
> overstepping the bounds of the CoC.I also find the behavior of those
> pushing such an approach to be hostile and overly aggressive. Why do you
> need to force a copy of the CoC into every repo? Why not keep it in a
> central location? What kind of mess would you need to cleanup if for some
> reason you needed to adjust the contents of that file? Instead of having
> one location to update you now have 800+ copies that need fixed.
>
> On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 8:23 PM, Yaron Koren  wrote:
>
> >  Chris Koerner  wrote:
> > > “Please just assume for the sake of this discussion that (a) I'm
> willing
> > > to abide by the rules of the Code of Conduct, and (b) I don't want the
> > > CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md file in my extensions.”
> > > Ok, hear me out here. What if I told you those two things are
> > > incompatible? That abiding by the community agreements requires the
> file
> > > as an explicit declaration of said agreement. That is to say, if we had
> > > a discussion about amending the CoC to be explicit about this
> expectation
> > > you wouldn’t have issues with including it? Or at least you’d be OK
> with
> > > it?
> >
> > Brian is right that adding a requirement to include this file to the CoC
> > would be an odd move. But, if it did happen, I don't know - I suppose I'd
> > have two choices: either include the files or remove my code. I would be
> an
> > improvement over the current situation in at least one way: we would know
> > that rules are still created in an orderly, consensus-like way, as
> opposed
> > to now, where a small group of developers can apparently make up rules as
> > they go along.
> >
> > -Yaron
> > ___
> > Wikitech-l mailing list
> > Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
> >
> ___
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Can/should my extensions be deleted from the Wikimedia Git repository?

[John]

Honestly I find forcing documentation into repos to be abrasive, and
overstepping the bounds of the CoC.I also find the behavior of those
pushing such an approach to be hostile and overly aggressive. Why do you
need to force a copy of the CoC into every repo? Why not keep it in a
central location? What kind of mess would you need to cleanup if for some
reason you needed to adjust the contents of that file? Instead of having
one location to update you now have 800+ copies that need fixed.

On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 8:23 PM, Yaron Koren  wrote:

>  Chris Koerner  wrote:
> > “Please just assume for the sake of this discussion that (a) I'm willing
> > to abide by the rules of the Code of Conduct, and (b) I don't want the
> > CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md file in my extensions.”
> > Ok, hear me out here. What if I told you those two things are
> > incompatible? That abiding by the community agreements requires the file
> > as an explicit declaration of said agreement. That is to say, if we had
> > a discussion about amending the CoC to be explicit about this expectation
> > you wouldn’t have issues with including it? Or at least you’d be OK with
> > it?
>
> Brian is right that adding a requirement to include this file to the CoC
> would be an odd move. But, if it did happen, I don't know - I suppose I'd
> have two choices: either include the files or remove my code. I would be an
> improvement over the current situation in at least one way: we would know
> that rules are still created in an orderly, consensus-like way, as opposed
> to now, where a small group of developers can apparently make up rules as
> they go along.
>
> -Yaron
> ___
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Can/should my extensions be deleted from the Wikimedia Git repository?

[Yaron Koren]

 Chris Koerner  wrote:
> “Please just assume for the sake of this discussion that (a) I'm willing
> to abide by the rules of the Code of Conduct, and (b) I don't want the
> CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md file in my extensions.”
> Ok, hear me out here. What if I told you those two things are
> incompatible? That abiding by the community agreements requires the file
> as an explicit declaration of said agreement. That is to say, if we had
> a discussion about amending the CoC to be explicit about this expectation
> you wouldn’t have issues with including it? Or at least you’d be OK with
> it?

Brian is right that adding a requirement to include this file to the CoC
would be an odd move. But, if it did happen, I don't know - I suppose I'd
have two choices: either include the files or remove my code. I would be an
improvement over the current situation in at least one way: we would know
that rules are still created in an orderly, consensus-like way, as opposed
to now, where a small group of developers can apparently make up rules as
they go along.

-Yaron
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Can/should my extensions be deleted from the Wikimedia Git repository?

[Brian Wolff]

I for one think that requiring a specific filesystem structure or notice in
a git repo is quite far afield from the sorts of things that CoC is
designed to deal with.

--
Brian

On Thursday, June 7, 2018, Chris Koerner  wrote:
> “Please just assume for the sake of this discussion that (a) I'm willing
to abide by the rules of the Code of Conduct, and (b) I don't want the
CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md file in my extensions.”
> Ok, hear me out here. What if I told you those two things are
incompatible? That abiding by the community agreements requires the file as
an explicit declaration of said agreement. That is to say, if we had a
discussion about amending the CoC to be explicit about this expectation you
wouldn’t have issues with including it? Or at least you’d be OK with it?
>
>
>
> Yours,
> Chris K.
> ___
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Can/should my extensions be deleted from the Wikimedia Git repository?

[Chris Koerner]

“Please just assume for the sake of this discussion that (a) I'm willing to 
abide by the rules of the Code of Conduct, and (b) I don't want the 
CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md file in my extensions.”
Ok, hear me out here. What if I told you those two things are incompatible? 
That abiding by the community agreements requires the file as an explicit 
declaration of said agreement. That is to say, if we had a discussion about 
amending the CoC to be explicit about this expectation you wouldn’t have issues 
with including it? Or at least you’d be OK with it?



Yours,
Chris K.
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Can/should my extensions be deleted from the Wikimedia Git repository?

[Yaron Koren]

Hi,

Thanks for the responses so far.

Max Semenik  wrote:

> However, users who disagree with the rules of using our resources
shouldn't be using them.

I actually agree with this. However, I'm not aware that needing to have a
CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md file is a "rule" - it was never voted on, never
announced; it was just something a few developers did, and now are
apparently threatening anyone who undoes their handiwork.

> Your
> personal interactions related to these extensions are kinda gray area,

I don't see that - the CoC makes it pretty clear that it applies only in a
pretty finite set of spaces.

> That being said, which parts of the CoC do you have a problem with?

I never said I had a problem with the CoC; I do have various thoughts about
it, but I don't want to include them in this thread, because I don't want
to distract from the main issues.

Chris Koerner  wrote:

> If the patch is submitted to a Wikimedia technical space (Gerrit) then
> the submitter would be expected to follow the community expectations
> outlined in the Code of Conduct.

That's true, but to be clear, I was talking about someone emailing a patch
text file to me.

> So, the question I would put to you or anyone asking "Why do I have to
> have this here?" would be, "Does having the Code of Conduct make my
> work in this space easier and more productive?"

Actually, that's not my question - my question is, *do* I have to have this
here? I haven't yet gotten a clear answer on this, except from the crowd
who put that file in in the first place. Max seems to agree that I don't,
although I'm not 100% sure.

Let me state again that I really don't want to talk about the relative
merits of the Code of Conduct. I have a bunch of thoughts about it, which
I'm happy to share with anyone, but not on this thread. Please just assume
for the sake of this discussion that (a) I'm willing to abide by the rules
of the Code of Conduct, and (b) I don't want the CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md file in
my extensions.

-Yaron
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Can/should my extensions be deleted from the Wikimedia Git repository?

[Chris Koerner]

Yaron,
I read over the conversation and would like to posit the question in a
different way.

> Some corporate person, for example, downloading my software, could see that 
> file and think
> that they're bound by the Code of Conduct when sending me a patch, when in 
> fact (for better or worse) they're not.

If the patch is submitted to a Wikimedia technical space (Gerrit) then
the submitter would be expected to follow the community expectations
outlined in the Code of Conduct. This, in my opinion, is a benefit to
you and other extension contributors. The CoC says (paraphrasing), if
you want to participate, great. We do have some things that are
considered unacceptable behavior. We include mention of this in
visible locations where it makes sense so folks are aware.

This should deter most well-reasoned folks from letting the worst of
themselves get the best of them. For those that persist in ignorance
of the expectations of the community, we can show them the door.

This keeps you, and any other individual contributor, from having to
figure out how to respond to anyone being a jerk new again each and
every time. It sets clear expectations for new members of our
community on how we treat each other.

So, the question I would put to you or anyone asking "Why do I have to
have this here?" would be, "Does having the Code of Conduct make my
work in this space easier and more productive?"

In my opinion, yes. Please take a moment and consider this before
deleting anything.

Yours,
Chris Koerner
clkoerner.com

___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Can/should my extensions be deleted from the Wikimedia Git repository?

[Max Semenik]

My personal opinion is twofold:

* The file shouldn't be mandatory because all policies should (and do)
apply automatically, there should be no magic spell to enable them on a
case by case basis. CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md is mostly a GitHub convention that
allows that site to indicate CoC terms in its interface.

* However, users who disagree with the rules of using our resources
shouldn't be using them. If you're using Gerrit/Phabricator/wikis/lists/etc,
you're bound by our community's rules as far as interactions there go. Your
personal interactions related to these extensions are kinda gray area,
however it's important to remember that these don't just happen out of
nothing. For example, if someone asks you a question related to your
extension, this is probably because they've found it on mw.org and
downloaded it from our Git or ExtensionDistributor. Therefore, while we
don't want to play thought police we at the same time can't pretend we
don't care about them non-private aspects.

That being said, which parts of the CoC do you have a problem with?

On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 2:01 PM, Yaron Koren  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md is a file that was added to most MediaWiki extensions
> almost exactly a year ago. It reads, in full:
>
> "The development of this software is covered by a [Code of Conduct](
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct)."
>
> This file was added on the grounds that "Now that we have a Code of Conduct
> we need to advertise it." You can see the Phabricator task for adding the
> file everywhere, including a lot of debate over whether it's a good idea,
> here:
>
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T165540
>
> I removed these files from all my extension directories pretty soon after
> they were added, on the grounds that I just think it's false information -
> the development of my extensions happens mostly on my and others' laptops,
> in private emails and so forth - not "Wikimedia spaces", and thus not
> covered by the Code of Conduct, according to the CoC. Some corporate
> person, for example, downloading my software, could see that file and think
> that they're bound by the Code of Conduct when sending me a patch, when in
> fact (for better or worse) they're not.
>
> That's how it went until two days ago, when Antoine Musso submitted a patch
> for my Site Settings extension (I don't know why that one specifically),
> re-adding the file. I rejected the patch, on the same grounds as before,
> but another developer, Chad Horohoe, overrode me and merged it in. That led
> to a discussion featuring Antoine, Chad, a few other WMF developers, and
> me, which you can find here:
>
> https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/437555/
>
> Some of the (unbelievable) highlights:
>
> - From Antoine: "Well then can we just archive this repository please?"
>
> - From Chad: "Yeah no that's not how it works. If it's being hosted on
> gerrit.wikimedia.org, it needs a CoC file. If you object to that, you can
> find hosting elsewhere."
>
> - From Amir Sarabadani: "Having CoC removed seems violation of CoC itself."
>
> That last one is interesting, because the Code of Conduct doesn't mention
> CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md at all. Which I would have thought Amir would know,
> given that he's now a member of the "Code of Conduct Committee". (!)
>
> Actually, CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md isn't really mentioned anywhere - it was never
> voted on, and I don't believe it was even a directive from WMF management.
> As far as I know, this was the work of a few solitary (can I say "rogue"?)
> WMF developers who happen to have the ability to modify all the
> repositories - and, I guess, are into advertising.
>
> Now, we could talk about whether the CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md file is a good idea
> - or whether it's even accurate - but I'd rather talk about the most
> pressing issue, which is that a few developers have seemingly threatened to
> delete my extensions from the Wikimedia Git repository.
> That leads me to a few questions:
>
> - Do developers like Chad Horohoe have the right to delete my extensions
> from the repository? (I'm guessing they have the ability.)
>
> - Is CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md now really mandatory?
>
> - Is there some kind of chain of command, or process, for determining these
> things, or are we in sort of a Wild West situation where whoever has the
> ability to modify or delete other people's extensions can do so without
> consequences?
>
> Any thoughts or insight on these questions are welcome. There are some
> disturbing implications to that thread, that I'd like to see resolved.
>
> -Yaron
> ___
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l




-- 
Best regards,
Max Semenik ([[User:MaxSem]])
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

[Wikitech-l] Can/should my extensions be deleted from the Wikimedia Git repository?

[Yaron Koren]

Hi,

CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md is a file that was added to most MediaWiki extensions
almost exactly a year ago. It reads, in full:

"The development of this software is covered by a [Code of Conduct](
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct)."

This file was added on the grounds that "Now that we have a Code of Conduct
we need to advertise it." You can see the Phabricator task for adding the
file everywhere, including a lot of debate over whether it's a good idea,
here:

https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T165540

I removed these files from all my extension directories pretty soon after
they were added, on the grounds that I just think it's false information -
the development of my extensions happens mostly on my and others' laptops,
in private emails and so forth - not "Wikimedia spaces", and thus not
covered by the Code of Conduct, according to the CoC. Some corporate
person, for example, downloading my software, could see that file and think
that they're bound by the Code of Conduct when sending me a patch, when in
fact (for better or worse) they're not.

That's how it went until two days ago, when Antoine Musso submitted a patch
for my Site Settings extension (I don't know why that one specifically),
re-adding the file. I rejected the patch, on the same grounds as before,
but another developer, Chad Horohoe, overrode me and merged it in. That led
to a discussion featuring Antoine, Chad, a few other WMF developers, and
me, which you can find here:

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/437555/

Some of the (unbelievable) highlights:

- From Antoine: "Well then can we just archive this repository please?"

- From Chad: "Yeah no that's not how it works. If it's being hosted on
gerrit.wikimedia.org, it needs a CoC file. If you object to that, you can
find hosting elsewhere."

- From Amir Sarabadani: "Having CoC removed seems violation of CoC itself."

That last one is interesting, because the Code of Conduct doesn't mention
CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md at all. Which I would have thought Amir would know,
given that he's now a member of the "Code of Conduct Committee". (!)

Actually, CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md isn't really mentioned anywhere - it was never
voted on, and I don't believe it was even a directive from WMF management.
As far as I know, this was the work of a few solitary (can I say "rogue"?)
WMF developers who happen to have the ability to modify all the
repositories - and, I guess, are into advertising.

Now, we could talk about whether the CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md file is a good idea
- or whether it's even accurate - but I'd rather talk about the most
pressing issue, which is that a few developers have seemingly threatened to
delete my extensions from the Wikimedia Git repository.
That leads me to a few questions:

- Do developers like Chad Horohoe have the right to delete my extensions
from the repository? (I'm guessing they have the ability.)

- Is CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md now really mandatory?

- Is there some kind of chain of command, or process, for determining these
things, or are we in sort of a Wild West situation where whoever has the
ability to modify or delete other people's extensions can do so without
consequences?

Any thoughts or insight on these questions are welcome. There are some
disturbing implications to that thread, that I'd like to see resolved.

-Yaron
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l