Just curious if I should add a code of conduct to my projects. I've seen good and bad things come out of them in the past, but if people really want it I can oblige.
I think it's reasonable for large software projects to have Code of Conduct. When I'm working on something small with few collaborators, it's too much process.
"No Code of Conduct", to me, looks like what All Lives Matter is to Black Lives Matter, that is, a deflection from the actual problem.
I somewhat agree with the general 'Don't be a jerk' principle. It has its place. But it doesn't scale for large projects.
This problem is, it's too discretionary. It isn't an actual policy you can point to if someone to decides to become zealously sexist or homophobic in a software project -- things that I haven't encountered much, but if you're maintaining a project with 10,000+ stars and hundreds of contributors, maintainers sometimes have to wear a moderator hat.
Don’t you think that the project owners are obligated to the code of conduct they wrote themselves? Why should I contribute if the project handles this way?
Most projects already have formal or informal rules set in place for discussion, project management, issue tracking.
A code of conduct would be redundant as such. More often than not, it seems to mostly be a veiled appeasement. The Linux kernel's "Code of Conflict" is a blatant and hilarious example of this.
Isn't it the point of the code of conduct to put off troublesome people and to facilitate collaboration between contributors? Maybe it works as intended?
I always like to see these. A good code of conduct benefits all kinds of people and generally brings awareness to the general level of quality of a project. It also helps to onboard people who genuinely want to participate in a community but who may suffer from a lack of experience.
Even for individuals who strive to live by a high-quality subjective code of ethics, and for whom a code of ethics is a big "why is that even necessary (because I'm already a good person and you already should be, too)"--it's good to get familiar with external standards and learn to engage with them.
There are groups of people for whom a lack of attention to the external/objective/group-shared standard is simply a no-go, and yes, there are people for whom the lack of a shared code is an unfortunate invitation to engage in unappreciated behavior. The "we" is more important than the "I" in many ways, and sometimes the "we" has to put its foot down, and if that seems a bit ridiculous and broad, so be it, but at least it's something.
This particular code seems to embrace an overarching dichotomy, or dimension, from "expected behavior" to "unacceptable behavior." In my experience the Foundation will probably benefit from additional perspectives and even additional dichotomies which deepen and enhance the code over time. It's good to be flexible, prospective, and forward-looking with these kinds of things. Anyway, I'm glad to see it.
From what I understand, the code of conduct is supposed to limit the participation in the community around the software. Issue tracking, support groups etc. If you don't adhere to it, you're free to fork and make your own github repo, discourse, IRC channels or whatever.
Code of conducts are a response to the democratization and increased accessibility of software development. Like in other communities, as the number of collaborators increases and the number of personalities, behaviors, backgrounds, and ideologies intersect, the chance of disagreements goes up.
Code of conducts are a sane effort to highlight behavior that won't be tolerated, such that it's written down and no longer implicit.
That being said, one is free to disagree with the content of a particular code of conduct if the content does not appeal, but a mere presence of one should not result in becoming dismissive of a project.
I fully agree with the Code of Conduct (which has more and more become a thing recently), but I don't think it needs an extra mention or file in repositories.
Not harassing and respecting others is common sense. There's just no need to mention that.
I fear soon repository owners will be considered rude if they don't want extra clutter added to their repos (if this hasn't happened already).
A facetious example of the lunacy of the existing "Code of Conduct" brigade:
- Project members must be treated with impunity if they wear footwear inside or not but especially if the footwear is required to define the personality of the wearer.
- Project members must be treated with impunity if they smoke inside or not, especially if their preference is vape brand bubble gum heaven.
- Obey the law, obey the speed limit in your country.
- Obey the law, pay for your groceries.
- The contribution of code, ideas or documentation to the project is unnecessary.
A Sane "Code of Conduct", which would not be written down because it's implied by baseline civility and common sense:
- This project requires cordial behaviour from everyone involved.
- This project is to improve this particular software (and/or documentation, artwork etc)
I see. I agree that any such code of conduct should be limited to communications involving the project directly, and be the minimal set of rules necessary to ensure civility.
reply