Re: GR proposal: code of conduct
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 10:49:51PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst writes ("Re: GR proposal: code of conduct"):
> > > > 2. The initial text of this code of conduct replaces the "mailinglist
> > > > code of conduct" at http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct
> > >
> > > Is this overriding the listmasters then?
> > I'll leave it up to the secretary to decide whether this is, indeed,
> > overriding listmasters, but I don't think it is, or should be.
> I think it would be better to get an opinion from the listmasters. If
> the listmasters are happy with the GR then clearly it's not overruling
> them. If they are unhappy with it then given that they're mostly
> going to be implementing it we should hear about it and take their
> comments on board!
> I would be happy to second this GR provided that the listmasters
> approve, or at least don't object.
> I don't want to CC the listmasters in this thread on -vote because
> they probably don't want a zillion crossposts. As the proponent and
> editor, would you send them a mail asking their opinion ?
I did actually already do that (by mail to listmaster@, on 2013-11-27,
with Message-ID: <5295BDA8.firstname.lastname@example.org>), but never got a reply.
Whether that is because the mail was forgotten, or because they just
agreed with it and didn't think it therefore required a reply or
something else entirely, I cannot say. But given the level of consensus
I had already achieved on -project, and given the fact that I do think
it is mostly in line with their current policies, means I thought it
better to move this forward.
If indeed listmasters do object (which I don't think will be the case,
but of course I can't read their minds), then obviously we'll need to
work with them to fix that. Indeed, if what we propose is in line with
what listmasters believe should be done, then this issue would be moot,
> > > So, we have a Foundation Document, or a Position Statement that's agreed
> > > by GR, and then can be changed by the DPL to a delegate. I don't think
> > > this is entirely constitutional...
> I think this would be dealt with by a rubric at the top of the GR
> which says:
> The Debian Project adopts the following Position Statement under
> 4.1.5 of the Constitution. (This is not a Foundation Document.)
That sounds reasonable, yes.
> > The position statement really only is the "we accept a code of conduct"
> > part. Everything else isn't.
> The part saying the DPL can change the CoC surely is part of the
> position statement.
Yes, obviously. What I meant was the bits on top, excluding the CoC
itself; as in, the concept of a CoC and its procedures is what the vote
is about, not the actual text of the CoC.
> > Maybe that means I should not put the text of the code of conduct inline
> > with the rest of the GR? If so, I'll happily do so.
> I think you should indent it, or put it in an appendix, or something.
Yes, that would work, too.
This end should point toward the ground if you want to go to space.
If it starts pointing toward space you are having a bad problem and you
will not go to space today.