xdg Digest, Vol 157, Issue 3

Albert Astals Cid aacid at kde.org
Thu Apr 13 18:39:14 UTC 2017

El dimecres, 12 d’abril de 2017, a les 17:49:56 CEST, Daniel Stone va 
> 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 
> >> 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.


More information about the xdg mailing list