RE: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by address@hidden)

[Mike Solomon]

Janek Warchoł <address@hidden> writes:

> Hi,
>
> śr., 5 lut 2020, 00:34 użytkownik <address@hidden> napisał:
>
>> What problem are we trying to solve here?
>>
>
> In short, it's been found (I think Mike will be able to give you 
> specific
> examples) that having code of conduct encourages contributions from 
> newcomers.

> I rather think that a friendly atmosphere encourages contributions from 
> newcomers.  Whether an upfront requirement to commit to a set of rules with 
> an enforcement team is perceived as a guarantee of a friendly atmosphere is 
> debatable.

I personally would feel more comfortable if there were a code of conduct, and I 
know within my company one employee will not attend a conference or participate 
in a project unless there is a code of conduct.  I don't have any hard stats to 
prove this, but have a gut feeling that a code of conduct opens more doors than 
it closes.

> So in light of my personal experiences with this kind of backroom channel 
> (and it's worth noting that even the cited Linux developer list removed the 
> corrective measures part from the CoC they are using), I would very much like 
> to see some more imminent reason of why LilyPond would stand to benefit from 
> adopting a code and accepting a corrective committee that has basically 
> proposed itself rather than being the result of a list-wide election and 
> where just one member has been a permanent fixture on the lists for a longer 
> amount of time at this moment.

A list-wide election is a good idea.

At the Salzburg meetup, one common thing a lot of people brought up was a 
slow-down in development and a shrinking pool of contributors.  IMO we should 
do several experiments to fix this. The CoC I proposed is used in over 40,000 
projects including many of the most active and diverse open source projects on 
github, so it seems like a reasonable experiment. If it proves to be a dud, we 
can get rid of it.

~Mike