Re: [Wikitech-l] Can/should my extensions be deleted from the Wikimedia Git repository?
On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 7:02 AM Alex Monk wrote: > I think Gerrit admin permissions were abused to remove the review > > https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/Documentation/access-control.html#category_remove_reviewer Anyone who is a project owner on mediawiki/* could have done it, it had nothing to do with admin permissions. But that's not the point of this thread at all... -Chad ___ 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?
On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 12:19 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. > > Probably. I was in a pretty crappy mood and I went "not again" and merged it. I don't actually care one way or the other if repos have the file (nb: I support the CoC), but I just want to be **consistent** If we're gonna have them: have them everywhere. If not, then we should be removing them everywhere. -Chad ___ 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?
Gergo Tisza wrote: > I'd still like the understand what the assumed harm is. Is this strictly a > moral issue, where you want to avoid giving misleading information, but > otherwise that information would be harmless? Or a liability issue, where > your clients think that working on / using a CoC-covered extension makes it > more likely that they get sued or publicly attacked? Or do you think you > might work with clients who might be deterred because they do development > in ways that violate the CoC, and would be unwilling to change that? Or > some clients might boycott such extensions for political reasons? If I can put words in your mouth, it sounds, based on the specific examples you give, like your real question is: how would I (and the people I work with) feel about having the scope of the Code of Conduct be expanded to match what CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md says? If so, that's a fair question, but I'd rather not answer it in this thread - I've been trying to keep this discussion focused on a few basic factual questions (is the CoC file accurate? Is it mandatory?), and even that has led to a pretty wide-ranging and heated discussion. So I'd rather not add another very big topic into the mix. It might make sense to create a separate discussion for that topic, though. -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?
On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 3:44 PM Yaron Koren wrote: > I suppose that one solution which hasn't been discussed yet is to change > the wording of that file so that it says something more defensible, like > "This extension is hosted on facilities governed by the Code of Conduct", > or that kind of thing - that would at least remove the pragmatic objection > that I (and some others in this thread) have raised. > Thanks for the constructive proposal, Yaron. I agree this is an accurate description of what the code of conduct says now about scope. I still think limiting scope like that is problematic and in the unlikely case that someone does abuse or harass community members outside Wikimedia platforms while simultaneously making use of those platforms, I believe the CoC committee would leverage that to deter them (threaten to ban or fork if it comes to that) - that seems like the only morally tenable option. So I guess the best way to resolve the issue is to make a CoC amendment proposal. It still leaves open the question of whether the file should be made > mandatory, and if so, what the mechanism should be to determine that. > A CoC committee decision, presumably? They are probably in the best position to tell whether it would meaningfully help their work or not. That said, we still haven't solved adding the file to new repos automatically, or added it to the repos created since last summer, or determined which non-extension/skin repos makes it sense to add to, all of which have much more impact than anything that could happen with the handful of repos where it is actively opposed. So it does not make sense to invest a lot of energy into this right now, IMO. As I wrote briefly before, I just don't think the file > is making an accurate statement, given that it implies that *all* > development of the extension is governed by the CoC, which is not the case. I'd still like the understand what the assumed harm is. Is this strictly a moral issue, where you want to avoid giving misleading information, but otherwise that information would be harmless? Or a liability issue, where your clients think that working on / using a CoC-covered extension makes it more likely that they get sued or publicly attacked? Or do you think you might work with clients who might be deterred because they do development in ways that violate the CoC, and would be unwilling to change that? Or some clients might boycott such extensions for political reasons? On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 8:23 PM Greg Rundlett (freephile) wrote: > I can also (as a consultant) see > how written policies which my clients see in my code could be construed as > a possible LIABILITY or RISK on their part. They'll either want me to > carry more indemnity insurance, or even be disinclined to do business with > me. Not because they don't abide by the code of conduct, but because > there's an explicit notice of some obligation that creates liability. Thanks for being specific about how the file is a problem for you. It is important for the health of the MediaWiki ecosystem that we make commercial MediaWiki development as frictionless as possible and don't create policies that place an undue burden on it. That said, code of conduct notices are already abundant in opensource software; we are not doing some kind of bold new experiment, just following the standard. Was there a chilling effect for projects that added such a file? Are you aware of consultants running into problems over that? How do you handle this issue in your own work in non-MediaWiki code? Do you, for example, choose between Javascript frameworks or PHP libraries you include in your extensions based on whether they include a code of conduct? On Sat, Jun 9, 2018 at 3:28 AM C. Scott Ananian wrote: > My personal opinion is (a) it should be mandatory, but the > contents not strictly proscribed -- in the same way that github > loosely-requires an open source license statement in its public repos (ie, > I think it's in the terms of service but not enforced by code), and (b) the > proper mechanism is probably techcomm/archcomm. On reflection, I think trying to involve TechCom would be a bad idea. In a contentious issue like this, any decision (or even the refusal to make one) would probably result in a loss of social capital, which is better spent on getting people on board with transforming MediaWiki architecture. The CoC committee on the other hand was selected and trained for expertise in specifically these kinds of social issues, and they don't have much standing to lose in the eyes of people who are dubious about the CoC anyway. On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 6:13 PM Brian Wolff wrote: > * Generally speaking, its usually considered in poorform to have an > argument about something, lose the argument (or at least not win it), wait > a year until people forget about it, and then try and do the exact same > thing. > While I disagree that this would be an accurate description of what happened, in
Re: [Wikitech-l] Can/should my extensions be deleted from the Wikimedia Git repository?
Let me say I am very much surprised on this whole debate. We call these in Hungary "storm in a glass of water". Please step back all for a moment and try to look at the whole stuff from a broader view. We have a very first world problem, to write and discuss and enforce codes of conduct, and advertise them everywhere. Have we? The best code of conduct is still *"Behave normally",* or, as it was moved to Meta from original place, *Don't be a jerk. *Everything is included. Yes, we will still have problems of different cultures, and this is normal. Those who cannnot accept that shouldn't participate in global projects. But we can work it out. This is the 43rd mail in this thread. To be honest, I have read only the first few. Is this whole thing WORTH the time of several highly trained programmers, whose working hours are measured with gold? Is this whole thing WORTH of forcing a volunteer, one of us, who is highly committed to our common dream, to do something that he is not OK with or quit? Is life long enough for that? Please study this essay on the topic thoroughly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qyclqo_AV2M Bináris ___ 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?
On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 9:44 AM, Yaron Koren wrote: > I suppose that one solution which hasn't been discussed yet is to change > the wording of that file so that it says something more defensible, like > "This extension is hosted on facilities governed by the Code of Conduct", > or that kind of thing - that would at least remove the pragmatic objection > that I (and some others in this thread) have raised. > Let's not lose sight of Yaron's proposal for compromise here. Having slightly different wording here seems like it would be a win-win for everyone: those who want to be sure new contributors get a pointer to the CoC would be satisfied, and Yaron would be satisfied that he is not misrepresenting the scope of the CoC in his own repositories. It seems that other multi-homed repositories might have similar wording tweaks. A repo which takes pull requests via github, for example, might have a CoC mentioning the applicability of github's CoC or WMF's CoC, depending on circumstances. I think there are a number of fascinating topics here, and it's probably certainly worth documenting the costs/benefits of WMF hosting (eg implicit +2 access by maintainers, which could be a con, but the pro side is that you get translatewiki integration, library upgrades, and other maintenance work done "for free") along with pointers so that new repo owners can easily find out exactly who has maintainer rights to their repo and a short history describing why that decision was made. That documentation would also be a good place for best practices such as README and CoC (as well as clarifying the circumstances where the CoC is expected to apply). > It still leaves open the question of whether the file should be made > mandatory, and if so, what the mechanism should be to determine that. > A good question. My personal opinion is (a) it should be mandatory, but the contents not strictly proscribed -- in the same way that github loosely-requires an open source license statement in its public repos (ie, I think it's in the terms of service but not enforced by code), and (b) the proper mechanism is probably techcomm/archcomm. This is just my opinion -- I'm interested in hearing further discussion of these points --- but let's not get distracted from considering (and hopefully accepting) Yaron's compromise offer. --scott ___ 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?
On 08/06/2018 15:26, Stephan Gambke wrote: > Incidentally, what is the procedure to request removal of +2 rights for > somebody on my extension repo? Hello, In Gerrit, the Mediawiki extensions all inherit rights from the 'mediawiki' group which has a lot of people: https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/admin/groups/4cdcb3a1ef2e19d73bc9a97f1d0f109d2e0209cd,members When we debated Gerrit user rights, the agreement was to have all those people to act as maintainers of all extensions. With the implicit agreement to not mess around. I think one of the benefit is you get functions updated magically, get the latest linters/tests, translations etc. So it is kind of a maintenance service offered to any extension hosted on Gerrit. For Wikimedia deployed extensions, SRE and Release Engineer require those rights. Surely for extensions that are actively maintained, the maintainers will want to review all those changes. At least to be aware of them. Though when we do mass changes (update function calls, bump linters version...), it is convenient to refer to the mediawiki group members instead of hunting for the proper maintainer. For the Lingo extension, it is owned by an empty group 'extension-Lingo': https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/admin/groups/d47037083d4a819970a5dda6a95bd503c7897cfd It still inherits rights mediawiki/extensions.git and thus inherits the 'mediawiki' group ownership. -- Antoine Musso ___ 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?
Hi! > I agree. I do think that as a community of practice we have many > unwritten rules and numerous expectations of how we work together. We > don't explicitly define the expectation of a README.MD file in repos > either.[0] It's a best practice and cultural expectation in our spaces > to include one. The code works the same with or with out it. I think there's several aspects here to consider: a) In WMF technical spaces, and more widely, in the Mediawiki/Wikimedia universe, I think there's universally acknowledged expectation of certain standards of behavior, which in the Wikimedia space have been codified in the CoC. The purpose of these expectations, as I understand them, is to build and maintain an open, welcoming, productive and inspiring community that would support development of Mediawiki and Wikimedia projects. And the CoC is the instrument that we chose to codify and implement those expectations in the Wikimedia spaces, which applies to all of them regardless of technical means chosen to publish or document it. I do not think there is much disagreement about that. b) How exactly the spaces are managed within this wide framework has a lot of complex and tricky details. Some of which may seem trivial to some people and highly sensitive to other people. Including which files are placed in which repositories, who is allowed to change which repository and for which reasons and procedures, and so on. I think having more clear expectations on that would certainly help. But beyond that, I think when designing and enforcing the rules for these minute details, we should not lose the sight of why it is done, and not make the process of CoC enforcement go against the goal of having CoC - namely, the welcoming community. If that means sometimes being more flexible, or having a bit more patient discussion and resisting the urge to force your point through, even if I am completely sure I am correct, I think it is still worth it in the long run. c) Specifically about CoC.md file, I personally think having redundant pointers to the documentation (both technical and about societal norms) is highly welcome, as locating proper docs is notoriously hard and largely unsolved problem with most code. Having the docs is half of the problem (which we also sometimes fail at ;), having it where people would find them is the other half. So adding of the CoC file from this point of view is a smart move. On the other hand, maintaining a rigid "one size fits all, no exceptions, no discussions, shut up and comply" approach to it feels a bit counter-productive to me. Yes, I foresee the question "if it is a good thing, why not make everybody do it?" - and I could probably easily write a 20-page essay on this topic, but I would limit myself here to this - people have different points of view, and I think being more accommodating in this case is better than having a nice set of checkboxes checked. What it specifically means for the specific file? I admit I don't have a better proposal than "let's have a community discussion on it". But I think making an open and welcoming community including sometimes being patient in figuring out how exactly to do it. Enforcing having the file in every single repo does not seem to be a pressing concern that would do any harm if not brought into compliance right now. So let's see if we can reach some consensus here. -- Stas Malyshev smalys...@wikimedia.org ___ 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?
On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 3:26 PM, Stephan Gambke wrote: > > It is not the first time that individual developers have misused their +2 > rights to sidestep community processes and enforce their political views. > It is this kind of repeated overreach and casual disregard for the wishes > and opinions of the repo owner that makes people choose GitHub over Gerrit. > > ... > > Incidentally, what is the procedure to request removal of +2 rights for > somebody on my extension repo? > If you really wanted, and your extension is not deployed to Wikimedia wikis, I think it could be done if you requested it on Phabricator. There are definitely repositories where the "normal" +2 reviewers (able to +2/-2 patches in mediawiki/core and extensions) do not have access (e.g. operations/mediawiki-config). But I'm not sure how it is implemented technically, the reviewers' righs might apply to the "mediawiki/* namespace"? in which case it could be a problem to change it for one repo. In this particular case though, Chad is a Gerrit administrator, so he would be able to merge the patch anyway. I don't think this problem calls for a technical solution. -- Matma Rex ___ 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?
On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 12:56 PM, Nischay Nahata wrote: > Also, its strange that someone can just remove someone else's code review > just like that on gerrit, add their own review and merge a patch. > This ability is very useful in some cases - for example, imagine a VisualEditor patch marked as "-2 Do not merge until Parsoid patch is deployed"; after said deployment, it is normal for someone else to remove the -2 review and approve the patch (imagine further that the original reviewer is on vacation). Note that only people with the right to give -2/+2 reviews can remove others' reviews. The fact that the review was removed is recorded in a comment, so the potential for abuse seems low. ___ 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?
I for one definitely support the "concept" of a CoC; and the enforcement of it. I also definitely agree with Yaron. He's not even arguing about the merits of a CoC. He's simply stating that the file doesn't belong in every single repo. I wholeheartedly agree with that position. He's also arguing (subsequent to point 1) that there was never a community decision to put the file everywhere. I think having it in every repo is clutter and counterproductive. Regardless of whether or not people pay attention to banners, footers, and other "messages" about policy, standards, or rules, you still have 'em. And they're not repeated in every single repository. I will assume that one major reason for GitHub placing it in every repo is for them to "CYA" when it comes to high stakes sexual harassment lawsuits. Now they'll make the case that it was "Posted No Trespassing" everywhere. I can imagine that WMF is doing the same. I can also (as a consultant) see how written policies which my clients see in my code could be construed as a possible LIABILITY or RISK on their part. They'll either want me to carry more indemnity insurance, or even be disinclined to do business with me. Not because they don't abide by the code of conduct, but because there's an explicit notice of some obligation that creates liability. I say take the file out of every repo. WMF has clearly stated it's policy of having a CoC. Advertise it in the UI of the technical spaces, not the file repositories. ~ Greg Greg Rundlett https://eQuality-Tech.com https://freephile.org On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 1:41 PM, Chris Koerner wrote: > Well, thanks gents for the replies. It looks like I was wrong in > assuming we were on the same page. > > I lack the emotional energy to keep up with this discussion for now. I > appreciate Yaron taking the time to be open to my questions and > conversations. I hope you can figure it all out. Have a good weekend. > > Yours, > Chris Koerner > clkoerner.com > > ___ > 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?
Well, thanks gents for the replies. It looks like I was wrong in assuming we were on the same page. I lack the emotional energy to keep up with this discussion for now. I appreciate Yaron taking the time to be open to my questions and conversations. I hope you can figure it all out. Have a good weekend. 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?
Tony Thomas <01tonythomas at gmail.com> wrote: > Scenario: I am new contributor looking at your repository (possibly > would've contributed to couple of repos in the past in Github). As a > maintainer of this repo, how do you want me to know that my interactions > with your product, which might be, but not limited to (1) creating an > improvement with you or the community on your extension (2) asking for > review on an improvement with you or the community on your extension is > secured under the CoC ? This has already been addressed by me and others on this thread, but it's worth repeating: in this scenario, your improvements to my software are *not necessarily* covered by the Code of Conduct. If they occur on Gerrit, Phabricator, etc. they are; if they occur by private email, over Skype, etc. they're not. That's why I think the file in its current wording is misleading. > probably I think the push back would've been > way lighter if you would've (1) explained your case clearly there in the > commit and (2) probably came up with alternatives so we could push forward > and (3) not merged it yourself. I don't believe there was any "pushback" - the current problems started when a few developers noticed that one of my extensions didn't have that file. -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?
I noticed CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md apparently wasn't forcibly added to repositories hosted on GitHub that are within the Wikimedia organization (some Diffusion repos too, it seems). GitHub is not WMF infrastructure, sure, but github.com/wikimedia/wmf-built-toolforge-tool certainly qualifies as a Wikimedia technical space, no? I'm not taking sides on this debate -- I just wanted to point out the inconsistency. ~Leon On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 12:47 PM Fæ wrote: > Yep. If anything, the consensus here demonstrates the opposite. > > Fae > > > On Fri, 8 Jun 2018, 17:42 John, wrote: > > > > Where? So far it's been a few individuals. > > > > > > Here, here. Can you please cite the clear community decision you are > > referencing? Just because a few users took unilaterally actions and most > > people didn't object, that isn't > > > > consensus. > > ___ > > 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?
Yep. If anything, the consensus here demonstrates the opposite. Fae On Fri, 8 Jun 2018, 17:42 John, wrote: > > Where? So far it's been a few individuals. > > > Here, here. Can you please cite the clear community decision you are > referencing? Just because a few users took unilaterally actions and most > people didn't object, that isn't > > consensus. > ___ > 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?
> Where? So far it's been a few individuals. Here, here. Can you please cite the clear community decision you are referencing? Just because a few users took unilaterally actions and most people didn't object, that isn't consensus. ___ 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?
On Fri, 8 Jun 2018, 17:08 Chris Koerner, wrote: > > You probably meant just "README". This is an interesting comparison. So, > if > > an extension lacks a README file, and that extension's maintainer refuses > > to put one in, should the extension be deleted from the Wikimedia > > repository? > > Let's back away from the ledge of deleting stuff. I'm not arguing for that > here. > > What I'm trying to get across (text lacks subtly) is that the > community is asking for you to include this file. Where? So far it's been a few individuals. ___ 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?
On Friday, June 8, 2018, Chris Koerner > [snip] > There are voices not present in this very public conversation. I have > been approached by a few that do not feel comfortable participating > here. I don't want to see anyone's contributions deleted. I also don't > want to see an exception made in this particular case because we as a > community haven't written it down somewhere. > [snip] Fwiw, I also had a discussion last night with someone who hasnt participated in this discussion as of yet but stated that incidents like this make them want to host their extensions elsewhere except they are not willing to pass up translatewiki integration-so the people not commenting objection goes both ways I dont think we should consider hearsay (particularly the type where we dont even specify the source) in discussions of these types. For one, regardless of what view you hold you can probably always find someone on the internet who agrees with you. Second if the people dont participate we cannot evaluate their arguments on their merits or count them. If its not for consensus seeking (evaluate args on merit) or for counting (voting) what's the point? -- brian ___ 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?
On Friday, June 8, 2018, Chris Koerner wrote: >> 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. > > I agree. I do think that as a community of practice we have many > unwritten rules and numerous expectations of how we work together. We > don't explicitly define the expectation of a README.MD file in repos > either.[0] It's a best practice and cultural expectation in our spaces > to include one. The code works the same with or with out it. > > Yeah, sure a coc.md isn’t “the same”, but both are expected as > something we do as a community. If we need to write that down > somewhere so there's no repeat confusion on if it's expected or not, > that seems like a good compromise. However, I'd like to think we don't > have to define everything, but ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ . > > [0] I'm waiting for someone to contradict me on this risky comparison. > :) I could not find anything explicit in > https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Gerrit/New_repositories or > https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Coding_conventions > > Yours, > Chris K. > > ___ > Wikitech-l mailing list > Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l The issue is, it seems like this is not something we "do" as a community: * There was a previous discussion about requiring coc.md. there was a lot of arguing and no clear "winner", but a very significant portion of the opinions was that CoC.md was highly recommended but not required if the extension maintainer didnt want it. Thus supporting Yaron's position. https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T165540#3358929 * There is a general community norm that overriding a -2 by a maintainer of a component is an extraordinary action, even more so when the person doing it is not a maintainer of the extension. This situation is no where near clear cut enough to justify that without discusion * Generally speaking, its usually considered in poorform to have an argument about something, lose the argument (or at least not win it), wait a year until people forget about it, and then try and do the exact same thing. -- brian ___ 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?
> You probably meant just "README". This is an interesting comparison. So, if > an extension lacks a README file, and that extension's maintainer refuses > to put one in, should the extension be deleted from the Wikimedia > repository? Let's back away from the ledge of deleting stuff. I'm not arguing for that here. What I'm trying to get across (text lacks subtly) is that the community is asking for you to include this file. You have refused on grounds of a lack of explicit clarity. I'm trying to say not everything is written down, nor does it need to be. The letter and the spirt. :) Your peers are asking for your consideration of something that impacts folks outside of your person. We have given this a great deal of our attention and time. Please consider the advice of folks who consider you a peer as well. Add the file not because it's explicitly demanded of you, but because the community is asking you to do so. It doesn't harm your code. It provides clarity around expectations on how we work together. There are voices not present in this very public conversation. I have been approached by a few that do not feel comfortable participating here. I don't want to see anyone's contributions deleted. I also don't want to see an exception made in this particular case because we as a community haven't written it down somewhere. I'll ask you plainly and directly. Yaron, will you please add the file to your repos? 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?
Chris Koerner wrote: > I agree. I do think that as a community of practice we have many > unwritten rules and numerous expectations of how we work together. We > don't explicitly define the expectation of a README.MD file in repos > either.[0] It's a best practice and cultural expectation in our spaces > to include one. The code works the same with or with out it. You probably meant just "README". This is an interesting comparison. So, if an extension lacks a README file, and that extension's maintainer refuses to put one in, should the extension be deleted from the Wikimedia repository? -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?
> 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. I agree. I do think that as a community of practice we have many unwritten rules and numerous expectations of how we work together. We don't explicitly define the expectation of a README.MD file in repos either.[0] It's a best practice and cultural expectation in our spaces to include one. The code works the same with or with out it. Yeah, sure a coc.md isn’t “the same”, but both are expected as something we do as a community. If we need to write that down somewhere so there's no repeat confusion on if it's expected or not, that seems like a good compromise. However, I'd like to think we don't have to define everything, but ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ . [0] I'm waiting for someone to contradict me on this risky comparison. :) I could not find anything explicit in https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Gerrit/New_repositories or https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Coding_conventions 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, > - Is CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md now really mandatory? Always looking for more inputs, but it would be great if you can provide a proposition. Scenario: I am new contributor looking at your repository (possibly would've contributed to couple of repos in the past in Github). As a maintainer of this repo, how do you want me to know that my interactions with your product, which might be, but not limited to (1) creating an improvement with you or the community on your extension (2) asking for review on an improvement with you or the community on your extension is secured under the CoC ? Now, I see this arguments questioning why we would even need a CoC. From my own experience and interactions with other newcomers - I can assure you that not everyone got through the first few months on #wikimedia-dev well. And this do vary a lot when you add diversity to the community (you know how that works). Anyway, I dont want to defend the need for CoC - as this is a well studied and documented one. The next question is always 'is something' better than 'nothing'. Also, I see that the comments on the Gerrit patch was to the point and might have been hurtful to you - but lets not forget that the commit message on the revert PR[1] was just "No Thanks" and self merged. Now this is not "what-about-ism" - but probably I think the push back would've been way lighter if you would've (1) explained your case clearly there in the commit and (2) probably came up with alternatives so we could push forward and (3) not merged it yourself. [1] https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/357614/ -- Tony Thomas https://mediawiki.org/wiki/User:01tonythomas -- On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 3:26 PM, Stephan Gambke wrote: > > > Frankly the harsh response from proponents and handling here, to the > > point of bypassing normal processes and misusing rights to enforce > > something that was never even decided as a community, seems completely > > at odds with the spirit and intent of the CoC in the first place. If > > we're trying to make contributors feel welcome, this is if anything > > doing the exact opposite. > > This! > > It is not the first time that individual developers have misused their +2 > rights to sidestep community processes and enforce their political views. > It is this kind of repeated overreach and casual disregard for the wishes > and opinions of the repo owner that makes people choose GitHub over Gerrit. > > It is a pity that there is even a need for a CoC, but I am more than happy > to have one if it helps to make people feel more comfortable. But > insinuating that not wanting that file in each and every repo would imply > disagreement with the code itself is not only insulting, it has a chilling > effect on the communication here. And by now, since this has happened and > has been called out repeatedly in this discussion, I consider it > intentional. > > The whole issue is another nice demonstration of why "benevolent" > dictatorship and decisions taken "for your own good" do not work. > > Incidentally, what is the procedure to request removal of +2 rights for > somebody on my extension repo? > > Stephan > > > ___ > 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?
Hi, Antoine - thank you; I see now that your statement before to archive my repository was just because you thought it was no longer in use. I feel better now. Gergo Tisza wrote: > * There can be all kinds of reasons why the CoC file is not appropriate for > some repository (which is why it wasn't added to all repositories, just > MediaWiki and its extensions). But if we let people remove it for the sole > reason that they don't like the code of conduct, what does it say about out > commitment to enforce it? Thanks for your thoughtful response. I just want to clarify that I do indeed have pragmatic reasons for not wanting that file, unrelated to my opinion of the CoC. As I wrote briefly before, I just don't think the file is making an accurate statement, given that it implies that *all* development of the extension is governed by the CoC, which is not the case. I suppose that one solution which hasn't been discussed yet is to change the wording of that file so that it says something more defensible, like "This extension is hosted on facilities governed by the Code of Conduct", or that kind of thing - that would at least remove the pragmatic objection that I (and some others in this thread) have raised. It still leaves open the question of whether the file should be made mandatory, and if so, what the mechanism should be to determine that. -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?
> Frankly the harsh response from proponents and handling here, to the > point of bypassing normal processes and misusing rights to enforce > something that was never even decided as a community, seems completely > at odds with the spirit and intent of the CoC in the first place. If > we're trying to make contributors feel welcome, this is if anything > doing the exact opposite. This! It is not the first time that individual developers have misused their +2 rights to sidestep community processes and enforce their political views. It is this kind of repeated overreach and casual disregard for the wishes and opinions of the repo owner that makes people choose GitHub over Gerrit. It is a pity that there is even a need for a CoC, but I am more than happy to have one if it helps to make people feel more comfortable. But insinuating that not wanting that file in each and every repo would imply disagreement with the code itself is not only insulting, it has a chilling effect on the communication here. And by now, since this has happened and has been called out repeatedly in this discussion, I consider it intentional. The whole issue is another nice demonstration of why "benevolent" dictatorship and decisions taken "for your own good" do not work. Incidentally, what is the procedure to request removal of +2 rights for somebody on my extension repo? Stephan ___ 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?
On 08/06/18 09:29, Gergo Tisza wrote: ... I'm sure you wouldn't act (inside or outside Wikimedia technical spaces) in ways inconsistent with the spirit of the code of conduct anyway, but this was a silly fight to pick and I hope you'll reconsider (or if you have pragmatic reasons for not wanting the file, you'll explain those). The CoC does not apply to contributors outside of Wikimedia itself. A repository that happens to be hosted by Wikimedia is not exclusive to Wikimedia, and a file like this can cause confusion among contributors/users elsewhere. This is a pragmatic reason for not having it, especially when these repositories are primarily created for these external contributors/users. But this is backwards - the default state was not having it in the repositories. Changing that (across the board) was what should have required justification, not going back. And given that it doesn't even affect whether or not the CoC applies if the file is there or not, what even is the point of all this? Frankly the harsh response from proponents and handling here, to the point of bypassing normal processes and misusing rights to enforce something that was never even decided as a community, seems completely at odds with the spirit and intent of the CoC in the first place. If we're trying to make contributors feel welcome, this is if anything doing the exact opposite. -I ___ 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?
I think Gerrit admin permissions were abused to remove the review On Fri, 8 Jun 2018, 11:57 Nischay Nahata, wrote: > It did sound like a threat given that no policy has been framed around > this, but I am glad to know that it was not your intent. > > Also, its strange that someone can just remove someone else's code review > just like that on gerrit, add their own review and merge a patch. > > > Regards, > Nischay Nahata > > > On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 3:46 PM Antoine Musso wrote: > > > On 08/06/2018 06:33, Nischay Nahata wrote: > > > 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. > > > > Hello, > > > > I disagree with the dictatorship manner, or I would just have force > > merged my own patch. I was more waiting for feedback from the repository > > owner and engage in a conversation. > > > > I don't have an opinion about the CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md beside that it has > > been added on all mediawiki repositories hosted on Gerrit and that it > > became the de factor standard on GitHub. I just happened to notice the > > file was missing and for sack of consistency proposed a change to > > restore it. > > > > > > About my comment on Gerrit: > > > > | Well then can we just archive this repository please? > > > > I was reacting to Yaron comment about development happening somewhere > else: > > | @Ladsgroup - not all of the development of this software is done on > > gerrit.wikimedia.org (actually, very little of it is). > > > > With the hasty conclusion on my side that: if the development is not on > > Gerrit and Yaron doesn't want the COC.md file, he should be free to move > > to a different hosting place. > > > > In restrospective, I got how that could sound as a threat to arbitrarily > > delete the repository. *Yaron I apologize*, that never has been my > intent. > > > > One sure thing, I am quite happy the topic get raised to wikitech-l > > which has a much larger audience than a single Gerrit change. We will > > see what the outcome happens to be. > > > > cheers, > > > > -- > > Antoine Musso > > > > > > > > ___ > > 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?
It did sound like a threat given that no policy has been framed around this, but I am glad to know that it was not your intent. Also, its strange that someone can just remove someone else's code review just like that on gerrit, add their own review and merge a patch. Regards, Nischay Nahata On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 3:46 PM Antoine Musso wrote: > On 08/06/2018 06:33, Nischay Nahata wrote: > > 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. > > Hello, > > I disagree with the dictatorship manner, or I would just have force > merged my own patch. I was more waiting for feedback from the repository > owner and engage in a conversation. > > I don't have an opinion about the CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md beside that it has > been added on all mediawiki repositories hosted on Gerrit and that it > became the de factor standard on GitHub. I just happened to notice the > file was missing and for sack of consistency proposed a change to > restore it. > > > About my comment on Gerrit: > > | Well then can we just archive this repository please? > > I was reacting to Yaron comment about development happening somewhere else: > | @Ladsgroup - not all of the development of this software is done on > gerrit.wikimedia.org (actually, very little of it is). > > With the hasty conclusion on my side that: if the development is not on > Gerrit and Yaron doesn't want the COC.md file, he should be free to move > to a different hosting place. > > In restrospective, I got how that could sound as a threat to arbitrarily > delete the repository. *Yaron I apologize*, that never has been my intent. > > One sure thing, I am quite happy the topic get raised to wikitech-l > which has a much larger audience than a single Gerrit change. We will > see what the outcome happens to be. > > cheers, > > -- > Antoine Musso > > > > ___ > 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?
On 08/06/2018 06:33, Nischay Nahata wrote: > 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. Hello, I disagree with the dictatorship manner, or I would just have force merged my own patch. I was more waiting for feedback from the repository owner and engage in a conversation. I don't have an opinion about the CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md beside that it has been added on all mediawiki repositories hosted on Gerrit and that it became the de factor standard on GitHub. I just happened to notice the file was missing and for sack of consistency proposed a change to restore it. About my comment on Gerrit: | Well then can we just archive this repository please? I was reacting to Yaron comment about development happening somewhere else: | @Ladsgroup - not all of the development of this software is done on gerrit.wikimedia.org (actually, very little of it is). With the hasty conclusion on my side that: if the development is not on Gerrit and Yaron doesn't want the COC.md file, he should be free to move to a different hosting place. In restrospective, I got how that could sound as a threat to arbitrarily delete the repository. *Yaron I apologize*, that never has been my intent. One sure thing, I am quite happy the topic get raised to wikitech-l which has a much larger audience than a single Gerrit change. We will see what the outcome happens to be. cheers, -- Antoine Musso ___ 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?
On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 8:18 AM Daniel Zahn wrote: > But we should not make it mandatory to keep a copy of this file in each and > every repo. > I'd argue we should, but let me say first that if we do make it mandatory, that should happen via some mechanism that's appropriate for making policy (RfC, TechCom decree, CoC committee decision, whatever) and not by making threats in a gerrit comment thread. I don't doubt that everyone involved had good intentions but the way the patch was merged was unfortunate IMO. That said: * The code of conduct is a tool to make contributors feel welcome. For some of us being welcomed when we contribute our time and knowledge to an opensource project is so natural that the effort might seem weird. Others (especially those belonging to a historically oppressed or heavily stereotyped group) have different experiences and might have become more cautious about putting time and mental and emotional effort into getting involved with a project, when such involvement in the past often resulted in them being criticized or insulted for reasons having nothing to do with their contributions. We should reach out to those people and tell them that we care, that the MediaWiki/Wikimedia developer community is a respectful space and they should feel safe to invest their time energy. * Site footers are not a good place for that message, because people only see them when they are fairly involved already. (Realistically, not even then. Do you use Github? Have you ever read Github's terms of servce? I didn't think so.) People interact with the files first, so that's the most obvious place to put such a message. Moreover, CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md is now the standard way of doing that notice, thanks to Github's efforts to promote it, so that's where people will look. If we want to signal something very conspicuously, and there is a standard way of signaling it, it would be dumb not to make use of that. * Wikimedia technical spaces are the ones where we can directly enforce the code of conduct. I don't think this means it ceases to exist at the borders of those spaces. I stand by the thought experiment I gave when this topic was discussed last year in the task Yaron linked: "Imagine a contributor who is very misogynist but also very respectful of social contracts. This person uses gerrit.wikimedia.org to host their code but runs their own issue tracker. Female developers get mocked and insulted when they file bugs, but their code submissions are treated politely because the gerrit ToU demands that. It seems ridiculous to me to suggest that the Wikimedia technical community should accept such a situation and not do anything against it, on the grounds that the abuse happens outside our technical spaces." * There can be all kinds of reasons why the CoC file is not appropriate for some repository (which is why it wasn't added to all repositories, just MediaWiki and its extensions). But if we let people remove it for the sole reason that they don't like the code of conduct, what does it say about out commitment to enforce it? It sends the message "we have a code of conduct, and we'll use it to protect you, except when the maintainer of some repository disagrees". I do not think we want that. I would be more sympathetic if I saw how having the CoC file there might harm or even just inconvenience maintainers, but removing it just to make some kind of philosophical point is unhelpful. Yaron, I respect you a lot as a developer, I think your involvement in the CoC discussions was always constructive despite clearly not liking the whole idea, and I'm sure you wouldn't act (inside or outside Wikimedia technical spaces) in ways inconsistent with the spirit of the code of conduct anyway, but this was a silly fight to pick and I hope you'll reconsider (or if you have pragmatic reasons for not wanting the file, you'll explain those). ___ 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?
This. The links should be in the interfaces in which we actually interact with each other, not the repositories themselves. A repository isn't even inherently a wikimedia technical space because it can be cloned anywhere, as Yaron rightfully points out; using gerrit/phab/things wikimedia manages to interact with it, however, is. Yes, people could potentially use those without going through the frontend UI, but it'd still hold. For them, if anything, it'd be even more important not to clutter up the repositories with redundant files, as they're working with more limited tools to begin with. Given that these files don't contain anything meaningful (just a link, thus requiring an extra step regardless to find the content); that developers won't have any particular reason to open these files from the repository while interacting with others, as the interaction that the CoC covers happens via tools such as gerrit/phab/etc; and that these files won't even be visible when people are using said tools as said tools normally show only what's currently being modified, I highly recommend losing the COC.md files entirely. It's clutter, to no particular gain. Generic advertising, at best, in an often irrelevant place. -I On 08/06/18 06:50, Nischay Nahata wrote: The right place for COC related stuff is probably on the Gerrit user interface. On Fri, Jun 8, 2018, 11:48 AM Daniel Zahn wrote: On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 11:40 PM, Max Semenik wrote: My personal opinion is twofold: I agree with Max here. The CoC applies anyways whether the file is in the repo or not because Wikimedia infrastructure is being used. But we should not make it mandatory to keep a copy of this file in each and every repo. I don't see how "not having the file is against the CoC itself" because it certainly doesn't say anything about that, in that regard Yaron is correct. -- Daniel Zahn Operations Engineer ___ 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?
The right place for COC related stuff is probably on the Gerrit user interface. On Fri, Jun 8, 2018, 11:48 AM Daniel Zahn wrote: > On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 11:40 PM, Max Semenik > wrote: > > > My personal opinion is twofold: > > > > I agree with Max here. The CoC applies anyways whether the file is in the > repo or not > because Wikimedia infrastructure is being used. > > But we should not make it mandatory to keep a copy of this file in each and > every repo. > > I don't see how "not having the file > is against the CoC itself" because it certainly doesn't say anything about > that, in that regard Yaron > is correct. > > -- > Daniel Zahn > Operations Engineer > ___ > 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?
On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 11:40 PM, Max Semenik wrote: > My personal opinion is twofold: > I agree with Max here. The CoC applies anyways whether the file is in the repo or not because Wikimedia infrastructure is being used. But we should not make it mandatory to keep a copy of this file in each and every repo. I don't see how "not having the file is against the CoC itself" because it certainly doesn't say anything about that, in that regard Yaron is correct. -- Daniel Zahn Operations Engineer ___ 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?
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?
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?
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
Re: [Wikitech-l] Can/should my extensions be deleted from the Wikimedia Git repository?
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
Re: [Wikitech-l] Can/should my extensions be deleted from the Wikimedia Git repository?
*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?
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?
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?
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?
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?
“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?
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?
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?
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?
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
