Community Code of Conduct

[Emily Shaffer]

Hi all,

I wanted to send a quick summary of the discussion ongoing in the review
for the Contributor Covenant in Gerrit.

It looks like we're down to two options: a slightly-modified LF Code of
Conduct, or a slightly-modified Contributor Covenant.

**Linux Foundation Code of Conduct**
+ Concise and vague language leaves room for us to address new problems we
aren't anticipating today.
+ We're already using it, so there's very little change to the community as
stands.
- As written today, it points to a community representative in the LF
organization as the first and only point of contact for escalations.
- The vague language may leave question of what constitutes abuse, leaving
room for gaslighting or otherwise leaving a victim unsure of whether they
can seek recourse.
- It's currently very unclear that the project is expected to adhere to
this CoC.

**Contributor Covenant**
+ Explicit language makes expectations clear and mitigates possibility of
bad actors on the escalation path
+ It's the CoC in use by many high-profile projects, including the Linux
kernel (github.com/torvalds/linux)
+ There is room for us to establish a line of escalation
- Explicit language may leave gaps for poor behavior we haven't anticipated

Please go ahead and reply with your +/- on the two documents if I've missed
something important to you.

Regardless, we have some additional actions to pursue:
* Indicate in documentation clearly that we have a Code of Conduct and how
to find it. (Mostly, if we keep the LF CoC.)
* Determine the escalation path. I see the following needs (please reply
with more or arguments):
** Reporters should have an expectation of confidentiality
** Reporters should be able to circumvent an individual on the path if
necessary for their safety (i.e. if someone on the escalation path is a bad
actor)
** Individuals on the escalation path should not be made to feel unsafe by
their participation. To elaborate, this is a hot topic in the FLOSS
community right now, and I'm worried about the possibility of trolls
harassing our escalation path members. (Maybe it's unreasonable?)
** Individuals on the escalation path should know and consent to being on
the escalation path. (I'm working on drafting a mail to the TSC to ask for
their support now, but that might not be the right way to move forward.)

-Emily

>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/openbmc/attachments/20181015/76b7b010/attachment.html>