New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md #24896

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Apr 30, 2018

Conversation

@egircys
Member

egircys commented Nov 10, 2017

Q A
Branch? master
Bug fix? no
New feature? no
BC breaks? no
Deprecations? no
Tests pass? n/a
Fixed tickets n/a
License MIT
Doc PR n/a

GitHub allows specifying a code of conduct for an open source project https://help.github.com/articles/adding-a-code-of-conduct-to-your-project/

The rule set seems maybe obvious, but it's good to have it included.

I've adopted the version http://contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/ with the email coc@sensiolabs.com

Moved initial proposal to symfony/symfony-docs#9394

@Simperfit

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Simperfit

Simperfit Nov 10, 2017

Contributor

I think this has to be discussed with the core team.

Contributor

Simperfit commented Nov 10, 2017

I think this has to be discussed with the core team.

@fabpot

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@fabpot

fabpot Nov 10, 2017

Member

Indeed, that's something that mush be discussed by the core team first. Good news is that we have planned to start a discussion about similar topics during SymfonyCon next week. Closing in the meantime.

Member

fabpot commented Nov 10, 2017

Indeed, that's something that mush be discussed by the core team first. Good news is that we have planned to start a discussion about similar topics during SymfonyCon next week. Closing in the meantime.

@fabpot fabpot closed this Nov 10, 2017

@lsmith77

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@lsmith77

lsmith77 Nov 18, 2017

Contributor

@egircys awesome initiative!

As part of launching the diversity initiative at SymfonyCon I am looking exactly for people like you motivated to take action!

I am currently educating myself on the topic. One of my first findings on the topic is that we should decouple the code of conduct oversight from any single entity. This of course requires motivated people commited to educating themselves on relevant topics and working to build trust within the community.

Can you contact me at smith@pooteeweet.org?

Contributor

lsmith77 commented Nov 18, 2017

@egircys awesome initiative!

As part of launching the diversity initiative at SymfonyCon I am looking exactly for people like you motivated to take action!

I am currently educating myself on the topic. One of my first findings on the topic is that we should decouple the code of conduct oversight from any single entity. This of course requires motivated people commited to educating themselves on relevant topics and working to build trust within the community.

Can you contact me at smith@pooteeweet.org?

@lsmith77 lsmith77 reopened this Nov 21, 2017

@lsmith77

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@lsmith77

lsmith77 Nov 21, 2017

Contributor

Instead of pointing to a sensio email address imho we should have a dedicated mailinglist and a named list of people with access to this mailinglist (in case someone f.e. wants to report but are not comfortable with all the people on the list, they have the option of contacting an individual from the list) who are not tied to just one entity. ideally the group should have people with a diverse background and some interest in the topic of diversity.

I guess it makes sense to put the CoC here but we should then also put it in the documentation.

Contributor

lsmith77 commented Nov 21, 2017

Instead of pointing to a sensio email address imho we should have a dedicated mailinglist and a named list of people with access to this mailinglist (in case someone f.e. wants to report but are not comfortable with all the people on the list, they have the option of contacting an individual from the list) who are not tied to just one entity. ideally the group should have people with a diverse background and some interest in the topic of diversity.

I guess it makes sense to put the CoC here but we should then also put it in the documentation.

@lsmith77

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@lsmith77

lsmith77 Nov 21, 2017

Contributor

BTW for anyone interested in the topic of CoC’s and this one in particular you might find this post useful https://philsturgeon.uk/2016/09/15/codes-of-conduct-maybe-theyre-not-so-bad/

Contributor

lsmith77 commented Nov 21, 2017

BTW for anyone interested in the topic of CoC’s and this one in particular you might find this post useful https://philsturgeon.uk/2016/09/15/codes-of-conduct-maybe-theyre-not-so-bad/

@lsmith77

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@lsmith77
Contributor

lsmith77 commented Nov 21, 2017

@javiereguiluz

Thanks @egircys. I like this a lot ... and we already do most of those things in this project, so this should be easy to implement.

I left some comments about "vague" statements that could be backdoors to abuse. But overall looks nice!

Show outdated Hide outdated .github/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md Outdated
Show outdated Hide outdated .github/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md Outdated
Show outdated Hide outdated .github/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md Outdated
Show outdated Hide outdated .github/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md Outdated
Show outdated Hide outdated .github/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md Outdated
Show outdated Hide outdated .github/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md Outdated
Show outdated Hide outdated .github/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md Outdated
@javiereguiluz

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@javiereguiluz

javiereguiluz Nov 21, 2017

Member

I forgot to mention that we should very clearly explain what is the Symfony community to which these rules would apply. For example:

  • Doctrine community, Doctrine repos and Doctrine managers are not part of the Symfony project, even lots of people think that they are.
  • Third-party bundles shouldn't belong to this CoC either (unless they voluntarily apply). So, if some person contribute to core Symfony repos and have their own personal repos with Symfony bundles ... these rules only apply to their work on the core Symfony repos.
  • Same for Twig, SwiftMailer, etc. do they belong to Symfony or not?
Member

javiereguiluz commented Nov 21, 2017

I forgot to mention that we should very clearly explain what is the Symfony community to which these rules would apply. For example:

  • Doctrine community, Doctrine repos and Doctrine managers are not part of the Symfony project, even lots of people think that they are.
  • Third-party bundles shouldn't belong to this CoC either (unless they voluntarily apply). So, if some person contribute to core Symfony repos and have their own personal repos with Symfony bundles ... these rules only apply to their work on the core Symfony repos.
  • Same for Twig, SwiftMailer, etc. do they belong to Symfony or not?
@lsmith77

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@lsmith77

lsmith77 Nov 21, 2017

Contributor

@javiereguiluz the scope is a very good question .. Doctrine, Twig, SwiftMailer etc are at this point very much part of the eco-system and as such leaving them out would likely not solve the problem we are trying to solve. So yes it would be maybe a good idea to include them .. but it would require some coordination. I guess with Twig/Swiftmailer it would be easier than with Doctrine.

Of course the next topics then might be other projects like Guzzle, PHPCR/Jackalope etc.

Generally maybe we should specifically allow other projects within the eco-system to 1) also adopt the CoC and if they want opt in to our reporting "infrastructure".

Contributor

lsmith77 commented Nov 21, 2017

@javiereguiluz the scope is a very good question .. Doctrine, Twig, SwiftMailer etc are at this point very much part of the eco-system and as such leaving them out would likely not solve the problem we are trying to solve. So yes it would be maybe a good idea to include them .. but it would require some coordination. I guess with Twig/Swiftmailer it would be easier than with Doctrine.

Of course the next topics then might be other projects like Guzzle, PHPCR/Jackalope etc.

Generally maybe we should specifically allow other projects within the eco-system to 1) also adopt the CoC and if they want opt in to our reporting "infrastructure".

@lsmith77

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@lsmith77

lsmith77 Nov 25, 2017

Contributor

@egircys

In general as stated above, I think it would be best to not fork the source version beyond adjusting the email for reporting. As such I would prefer to also keep their formatting so that we can more easily pull in upstream changes by simply copy & paste.

So is there a specific reason why you removed the 80 char limit from the original version?
ie. from https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-conduct.md

Contributor

lsmith77 commented Nov 25, 2017

@egircys

In general as stated above, I think it would be best to not fork the source version beyond adjusting the email for reporting. As such I would prefer to also keep their formatting so that we can more easily pull in upstream changes by simply copy & paste.

So is there a specific reason why you removed the 80 char limit from the original version?
ie. from https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-conduct.md

@egircys

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@egircys

egircys Nov 25, 2017

Member

I've reverted the changes and adjusted the email for reporting. I've added also the char limitation as it is in the original version. Initially the text was adopted from the GitHub CoC template, there is no char limitation.

Member

egircys commented Nov 25, 2017

I've reverted the changes and adjusted the email for reporting. I've added also the char limitation as it is in the original version. Initially the text was adopted from the GitHub CoC template, there is no char limitation.

Show outdated Hide outdated .github/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md Outdated
@jrobeson

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jrobeson

jrobeson Dec 8, 2017

Contributor

@lsmith77 : thanks for taking this on. It's much appreciated. Also thanks for not reinventing the wheel!

Contributor

jrobeson commented Dec 8, 2017

@lsmith77 : thanks for taking this on. It's much appreciated. Also thanks for not reinventing the wheel!

@timglabisch

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@timglabisch

timglabisch Jan 8, 2018

👎 why introducing any kind of politics? is there any ticket out there that would be Fixed by this PR?
There are tons of articles why CoC's can be a bad idea. Do you really want symfony to become a platform to discuss something like opal/opal#941 ?

if you really think we would need something like this i would suggest a code of conflict
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.12/process/code-of-conflict.html

or something like this: https://github.com/WebEngDUS/WebEngDUS/blob/master/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md#2-principles

timglabisch commented Jan 8, 2018

👎 why introducing any kind of politics? is there any ticket out there that would be Fixed by this PR?
There are tons of articles why CoC's can be a bad idea. Do you really want symfony to become a platform to discuss something like opal/opal#941 ?

if you really think we would need something like this i would suggest a code of conflict
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.12/process/code-of-conflict.html

or something like this: https://github.com/WebEngDUS/WebEngDUS/blob/master/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md#2-principles

@lsmith77

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@lsmith77

lsmith77 Jan 8, 2018

Contributor

For the opal incident I would refer to the following post to give a bit more context:
https://medium.com/@coralineada/on-opalgate-2efd0fc1e0fd

But yes, the proposed CoC would apply to a twitter account that mentions Symfony in th bio or is used frequently to discuss topics around Symfony.

As for the Kernel code of conduct and the other one proposed, I think there is a balance between being vauge and being explicit. As might evident by the discussions above with https://github.com/javiereguiluz he prefers being very explict. Those CoCs are however highly unspecific. More importantly the wording of the Kernel one along with the behavior permitted to Linus Torvald I would say its a prime example of a CoC that is so vague that its enforced can be achieved by apparently allowing any behavior to remain unchecked. I would very much say that if any core developers of Symfony would behave even half was bad as Linus, they should be removed.

In conclusion, I do think it makes sense to discuss how vague and how explict we should be, imho the two options you proposed are too vague.

Contributor

lsmith77 commented Jan 8, 2018

For the opal incident I would refer to the following post to give a bit more context:
https://medium.com/@coralineada/on-opalgate-2efd0fc1e0fd

But yes, the proposed CoC would apply to a twitter account that mentions Symfony in th bio or is used frequently to discuss topics around Symfony.

As for the Kernel code of conduct and the other one proposed, I think there is a balance between being vauge and being explicit. As might evident by the discussions above with https://github.com/javiereguiluz he prefers being very explict. Those CoCs are however highly unspecific. More importantly the wording of the Kernel one along with the behavior permitted to Linus Torvald I would say its a prime example of a CoC that is so vague that its enforced can be achieved by apparently allowing any behavior to remain unchecked. I would very much say that if any core developers of Symfony would behave even half was bad as Linus, they should be removed.

In conclusion, I do think it makes sense to discuss how vague and how explict we should be, imho the two options you proposed are too vague.

@timglabisch

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@timglabisch

timglabisch Jan 9, 2018

imho the two options you proposed are too vague.

Vague can be very powerful. If there are any kind of problem in the community we should take care, spend a lot of time to resolve it and teach how to contribute in a nice way.
But i don't think we should try to spend time on writing laws - it's error prone and can split a community.

I would very much say that if any core developers of Symfony would behave even half was bad as Linus, they should be removed.

Would we reject a PR because it's from Linus? Should we reject Linux support at?

I can't imagine any incident that we couldn't solve such an CoC:

Code of Conduct

Be friendly to everyone.
Let us ([E-MAIL]) know if you've any kind of problem.

I believe that the community wouldn't have that much incidents that the jury must be scaled with laws. It would allow us to evaluate each case individually - which would be the fairest possible.

timglabisch commented Jan 9, 2018

imho the two options you proposed are too vague.

Vague can be very powerful. If there are any kind of problem in the community we should take care, spend a lot of time to resolve it and teach how to contribute in a nice way.
But i don't think we should try to spend time on writing laws - it's error prone and can split a community.

I would very much say that if any core developers of Symfony would behave even half was bad as Linus, they should be removed.

Would we reject a PR because it's from Linus? Should we reject Linux support at?

I can't imagine any incident that we couldn't solve such an CoC:

Code of Conduct

Be friendly to everyone.
Let us ([E-MAIL]) know if you've any kind of problem.

I believe that the community wouldn't have that much incidents that the jury must be scaled with laws. It would allow us to evaluate each case individually - which would be the fairest possible.

@lsmith77

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@lsmith77

lsmith77 Jan 9, 2018

Contributor

I very much agree that we shouldn’t end up writing a detailed rule book. We should not duplicate the complexity of the legal system with police, lawyers etc. Obviously for absolute extreme forms of abuse/harassement, we should rely on the existing structures to deal with them.

As for rejecting PRs, I thimk if a developer continues with verbal abuse of community members even after a CoC being put into place that makes it clear this is not acceptable and having been reminded of this, then yes we should no longer allow this person to be part of this community, including rejecting PRs. While that individual might produce stellar code, the cost will still be higher when people leave or contribute less because of this verbal abuse, ie. the cost of a toxis genius are never worth it.

Contributor

lsmith77 commented Jan 9, 2018

I very much agree that we shouldn’t end up writing a detailed rule book. We should not duplicate the complexity of the legal system with police, lawyers etc. Obviously for absolute extreme forms of abuse/harassement, we should rely on the existing structures to deal with them.

As for rejecting PRs, I thimk if a developer continues with verbal abuse of community members even after a CoC being put into place that makes it clear this is not acceptable and having been reminded of this, then yes we should no longer allow this person to be part of this community, including rejecting PRs. While that individual might produce stellar code, the cost will still be higher when people leave or contribute less because of this verbal abuse, ie. the cost of a toxis genius are never worth it.

@theofidry

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@theofidry

theofidry Jan 10, 2018

Contributor

@timglabisch even though a CoC may not be a bullet-proof tool, it's not a legal document and you don't need a CoC to bring up politics neither do you need a CoC to deal with a jerk so in that sense a CoC is useless. It however shows an intent to not tolerate abusive behaviour and apparently it does work to a certain degree and make some people feel safer.

So don't be afraid of a CoC to "bring up politics", it will be political if one want to regardless of the CoC.

Contributor

theofidry commented Jan 10, 2018

@timglabisch even though a CoC may not be a bullet-proof tool, it's not a legal document and you don't need a CoC to bring up politics neither do you need a CoC to deal with a jerk so in that sense a CoC is useless. It however shows an intent to not tolerate abusive behaviour and apparently it does work to a certain degree and make some people feel safer.

So don't be afraid of a CoC to "bring up politics", it will be political if one want to regardless of the CoC.

Show outdated Hide outdated .github/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md Outdated
Show outdated Hide outdated .github/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md Outdated

@egircys egircys referenced this pull request Mar 5, 2018

Merged

Adding Code of Conduct #9394

4 of 4 tasks complete
@fabpot

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@fabpot

fabpot Apr 20, 2018

Member

Blocked by the PRs pending in the docs repository.
Also, @egircys can you change the branch target to 2.7 instead of master (as the CoC applies to all versions of Symfony)?

Member

fabpot commented Apr 20, 2018

Blocked by the PRs pending in the docs repository.
Also, @egircys can you change the branch target to 2.7 instead of master (as the CoC applies to all versions of Symfony)?

@egircys egircys changed the base branch from master to 2.7 Apr 20, 2018

Show outdated Hide outdated .github/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md Outdated
@fabpot

fabpot approved these changes Apr 20, 2018

@xabbuh

xabbuh approved these changes Apr 20, 2018

@nicolas-grekas nicolas-grekas added this to the 2.7 milestone Apr 24, 2018

fabpot added a commit to symfony/symfony-docs that referenced this pull request Apr 30, 2018

feature #9394 Adding Code of Conduct (egircys)
This PR was submitted for the master branch but it was squashed and merged into the 2.7 branch instead (closes #9394).

Discussion
----------

Adding Code of Conduct

Adding the Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct version 1.4.
Relates to symfony/diversity#1

**TODO**
- [x] Add the link to the enforcement team page
- [x] Add the link to the enforcement process
- [x] Add the link to concrete real-world examples of unwanted behavior
- [x] Change "Project maintainers" to "Enforcement team members"

Part of #9340 and #9393

Replaces symfony/symfony#24896

Commits
-------

02e4860 update contributor covenant link & documents fix
2de768f change project team to enforcement team
0e7b539 add link to core team
e61a403 Replace ethnicity with ethnic origin
2f8aa5d Change "race" to "ethnic origin"
1b0e633 Change "project's leadership" to "core team"
464ea45 add link to examples document
eba3ecf Adding Code of Conduct
@fabpot

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@fabpot

fabpot Apr 30, 2018

Member

Thank you @egircys.

Member

fabpot commented Apr 30, 2018

Thank you @egircys.

@fabpot fabpot merged commit bbbafba into symfony:2.7 Apr 30, 2018

1 of 3 checks passed

continuous-integration/appveyor/pr Waiting for AppVeyor build to complete
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build is in progress
Details
fabbot.io Your code looks good.
Details

fabpot added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 30, 2018

feature #24896 Add CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md (egircys)
This PR was squashed before being merged into the 2.7 branch (closes #24896).

Discussion
----------

Add CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md

| Q             | A
| ------------- | ---
| Branch?       | master
| Bug fix?      | no
| New feature?  | no
| BC breaks?    | no
| Deprecations? | no
| Tests pass?   | n/a
| Fixed tickets | n/a
| License       | MIT
| Doc PR        | n/a

GitHub allows specifying a code of conduct for an open source project https://help.github.com/articles/adding-a-code-of-conduct-to-your-project/

The rule set seems maybe obvious, but it's good to have it included.

I've adopted the version http://contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/ with the email coc@sensiolabs.com

Moved initial proposal to symfony/symfony-docs#9394

Commits
-------

bbbafba Add CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md

@fabpot fabpot referenced this pull request Apr 30, 2018

Merged

Release v3.4.9 #27102

@egircys egircys deleted the egircys:code-of-conduct branch Apr 30, 2018

@fabpot fabpot referenced this pull request May 7, 2018

Merged

Release v4.1.0-BETA1 #27181

This was referenced May 21, 2018

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment