Re: Code of Conduct final draft?

[Dave Neary <dneary free fr>]

Hi,

Jeff Waugh wrote:
> <quote who="Quim Gil">
>> Doing the process of updating the charter would be a failure? I don't see
>> why, this process could be healthy for the community, and the result would
>> be stronger and more sounded. In the meantime the list of recommendations
>> could be discussed, tested, improved, applied (it was being applied before
>> being written in a wiki page anyway).
> 
> That's precisely the point. Whether it's the charter or a new document, it
> is vastly more interesting to talk about the content and making it relevant
> to the GNOME community than argue about what it should be called and where
> it should go. This is just a diversion.

It appears the discussion has gotten to the stage where you're both
talking semantics (all three, with Murray).

Here's the summary, as far as I can tell:

1. We have the by-laws and charter. The by-laws are mostly legalese
template, and the charter has been treated mostly as a historical data
(it talks about the board providing technical direction, for example).

2. Quim is suggesting that reminding people about the core principles of
those two documents is more useful than making a third document official.

3. Jeff and Murray are both proposing that we use the "Code^WGuidelines
of conduct" as a basis to codify existing behavioural expectations of
our community.

4. 2 and 3 are the same thing. The GoC will be reminding people about
the core values of our community. Jeff's been asking for a while that we
actually look at the document, and see whether (as it is) it does
represent those core values (which have their basis in our charter).

So can we do that, please?

Might I suggest killing this thread, it's outlived its usefullness. A
new thread, with suggestions for additions or removals from the GoC ,
will perhaps be more productive.

Cheers,
Dave.

-- 
David Neary
bolsh gimp org