Skip to content
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

RFC 17 - Code of Conduct #17

Closed

Conversation

@jugglinmike
Copy link
Contributor

@jugglinmike jugglinmike commented Mar 18, 2019

In WPT issue gh-7520, @plehegar made an initial attemp to introduce a code of conduct based on the Rust language's policy. That seems like a good place to start from since it was only blocked on the existence of a group like the WPT Core Team. Should the code itself be included in this RFC?

One detail that needs to be decided is if the WPT Core Team is to be the same as the group of enforcers. Whatever the case, we should have some public commitment from each person who is listed in that document.

Here's the rendered version.

@gsnedders
Copy link
Contributor

@gsnedders gsnedders commented Mar 18, 2019

Should the code itself be included in this RFC?

Probably yes.

One detail that needs to be decided is if the WPT Core Team is to be the same as the group of enforcers.

I think both myself and @jgraham, per discussion on IRC earlier, strongly feel that it must not be. Otherwise if the question is about the conduct of the Core Team (in whole or in part) is in question, then the same group are trying to resolve it.

As I said earlier, I'd quite strongly prefer to have a more diverse set of individuals than the Core Team (really I'd rather that be more diverse too!), given plenty of conflict can be down to mistreatment of minority groups, and it helps to have people they feel will understand their concerns (and the almost entirely cis white men of the Core Team aren't that). That said, to do this will likely involve reaching out to people in browser communities that aren't so involved with standards or this project upstream (both of which are notably less diverse than the browser communities as a whole).

@foolip
Copy link
Member

@foolip foolip commented Mar 22, 2019

@jugglinmike can you propose changes for web-platform-tests/wpt#7520 to make this more concrete?

@jugglinmike
Copy link
Contributor Author

@jugglinmike jugglinmike commented Mar 22, 2019

@foolip The only change I have in mind is designating the makeup of the enforcement team. Based on @gsnedders' and @jgraham's input, that will require a concerted effort. It may be premature to discuss this as an RFC, so in recognition of the process's "accept by default" design, I'll close it for now. I've opened gh-21 in the hopes that we can continue to make forward progress.

@boazsender
Copy link

@boazsender boazsender commented Sep 10, 2019

I just submitted a patch to @plehegar original PR adding myself and @jorydotcom to the enforcement list. I suggest reopening this PR and merging it in here to serve as a final decision behind merging the CoC patches into WPT (web-platform-tests/wpt#18950 & web-platform-tests/wpt#7520),

@foolip
Copy link
Member

@foolip foolip commented Sep 10, 2019

Reopening. @web-platform-tests/wpt-core-team per our process we should leave one week for comments, which would mean resolving this during TPAC. We can discuss there too if needed.

@foolip foolip reopened this Sep 10, 2019
@foolip
Copy link
Member

@foolip foolip commented Oct 18, 2019

@jugglinmike what's the state of this now? Came here because web-platform-tests/wpt#7520 was assigned to me, assigned that to you instead :)

@jugglinmike
Copy link
Contributor Author

@jugglinmike jugglinmike commented Oct 18, 2019

@foolip I closed this and filed gh-21 as a prerequisite. That issue remains open, so I don't have anything new to add. @boazsender requested that this issue be assigned to him. I'm unable to do this; would you mind?

Boaz also made some modifications to gh-7520, so it may be appropriate to assign that to him as well.

@foolip
Copy link
Member

@foolip foolip commented Oct 18, 2019

@jugglinmike sure, I'll assign those to Boaz.

@thejohnjansen
Copy link
Contributor

@thejohnjansen thejohnjansen commented Nov 5, 2019

Hey everyone... where are we with this? This is the first step required before I can push the "editor" site out to its new domain. Is there anything still blocking here, or just waiting for a "LGTM" from everyone?

@boazsender
Copy link

@boazsender boazsender commented Nov 6, 2019

Thanks for bumping, and sorry for the delay. The next steps I have are to:

  • Suggest in process for volunteering CoC moderator group to WPT
  • Define enforcement guidelines

I've blocked off working time to make these proposals this on Thursday and will follow up then.

@jgraham
Copy link
Contributor

@jgraham jgraham commented Mar 12, 2020

What's the status here? Is anyone working on this issue?

@boazsender
Copy link

@boazsender boazsender commented Mar 12, 2020

Continued apologies for the delay. I haven't been able to prioritize time to write the additional policy. I will look into getting time for this this month.

@boazsender
Copy link

@boazsender boazsender commented Apr 16, 2020

Hi folks,
Its been six months and I haven't been able to work on enforcement guidelines or the process for adding new moderators. Please accept my apologies for the false start here.

Does anyone else on this thread have bandwidth to work on this, or know anyone with resources to support this work?

@stephenmcgruer
Copy link
Contributor

@stephenmcgruer stephenmcgruer commented Apr 17, 2020

Thanks Boaz; it can be hard to take the step back and acknowledge when one is overloaded, but it's also important so I appreciate you doing so :)

I have laid out what I believe the next steps are in the tracking issue (#21 (comment)) for this RFC. I think we should strive to keep discussion in that issue until we have a concrete proposal for the RFC.

@stephenmcgruer
Copy link
Contributor

@stephenmcgruer stephenmcgruer commented May 12, 2020

Closing in favor of #54, due to issues with editing this cross-fork PR.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Linked issues

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

7 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.