xdg Digest, Vol 157, Issue 3

[Albert Astals Cid]

El dimecres, 12 d’abril de 2017, a les 17:49:56 CEST, Daniel Stone va 
escriure:
> Hi Albert,
> 
> On 12 April 2017 at 09:05, Albert Astals Cid <aacid at kde.org> wrote:
> > El dimarts, 11 d’abril de 2017, a les 12:26:09 CEST, Daniel Stone va 
escriure:
> >> Constructive feedback on the specific form and wording of the CoC is
> >> more than welcome. What would be even better is if you're able to
> >> point to the experiences of other communities, the discussions they've
> >> had, and where they landed. The exact wording isn't irreversibly set
> >> in stone, and I'm sure we'll want to be tweaking it over time. What is
> >> set in stone is that we (the fd.o admins, who unanimously approved
> >> this change) are committed to this CoC, and will not be turning back
> >> from it.
> > 
> > Can you clarify why do you think the sysadmins have the right to impose
> > such a big change on the rest of the community without prior
> > consultation?
> freedesktop provides services to communities, including mailing lists,
> bug trackers, Git hosting, web hosting, etc etc. We as the admins
> already have to intervene to remove legally-impermissible content
> (e.g. when someone uploaded third-party proprietary code they weren't
> allowed to distribute, or when links to child pornography make it into
> mailing list archives) from these services, because the responsibility
> falls on fd.o as the provider rather than the more diffuse individual
> communities.
> 
> Our original plan was to offer the CoC (pre-made template text and a
> point of contact) as an opt-in, where projects could contact us and
> add it themselves. But, as with the above, behaviour of the individual
> communities reflects on fd.o as a whole. We aren't a diffuse/random
> hosting site like GitHub, but instead work with individually-selected
> projects. With this comes responsibility on both sides: we cannot just
> wash our hands of the behaviour of the member communities.
> 
> We did discuss this with a number of people, but with over 100 quite
> diffuse projects (some active, some stagnant, some abandoned, some
> unclear), and running fd.o not being a paid activity (or even the
> primary project we work on) for any of us, we weren't able to reach
> everyone. 

Why did you not use this list?

The frontpage of freedesktop.org says

"Contacting freedesktop: If you have any comments or questions about this site 
or its infrastructures, please send a message to the xdg list "

So it seems that this would have been the obvious place to discuss the 
application of a Code of Conduct and making it easy for eveyone involved in 
freedesktop to learn about it from the source instead of from the news.

Cheers,
  Albert