git/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md

146 строки
5.8 KiB
Markdown
Исходник Обычный вид История

add a Code of Conduct document We've never had a formally written Code of Conduct document. Though it has been discussed off and on over the years, for the most part the behavior on the mailing list has been good enough that nobody felt the need to push one forward. However, even if there aren't specific problems now, it's a good idea to have a document: - it puts everybody on the same page with respect to expectations. This might avoid poor behavior, but also makes it easier to handle it if it does happen. - it publicly advertises that good conduct is important to us and will be enforced, which may make some people more comfortable with joining our community - it may be a good time to cement our expectations when things are quiet, since it gives everybody some distance rather than focusing on a current contentious issue This patch adapts the Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct. As opposed to writing our own from scratch, this uses common and well-accepted language, and strikes a good balance between illustrating expectations and avoiding a laundry list of behaviors. It's also the same document used by the Git for Windows project. The text is taken mostly verbatim from: https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-conduct.html I also stole a very nice introductory paragraph from the Git for Windows version of the file. There are a few subtle points, though: - the document refers to "the project maintainers". For the code, we generally only consider there to be one maintainer: Junio C Hamano. But for dealing with community issues, it makes sense to involve more people to spread the responsibility. I've listed the project committee address of git@sfconservancy.org as the contact point. - the document mentions banning from the community, both in the intro paragraph and in "Our Responsibilities". The exact mechanism here is left vague. I can imagine it might start with social enforcement (not accepting patches, ignoring emails) and could escalate to technical measures if necessary (asking vger admins to block an address). It probably make sense _not_ to get too specific at this point, and deal with specifics as they come up. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Acked-by: CB Bailey <cb@hashpling.org> Acked-by: Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org> Acked-by: Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@google.com> Acked-by: Garima Singh <garimasigit@gmail.com> Acked-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> Acked-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Acked-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Acked-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> Acked-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> Acked-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> Acked-by: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk> Acked-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> Acked-by: Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com> Acked-by: Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@gmail.com> Acked-by: William Baker <williamtbakeremail@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2019-09-24 09:44:54 +03:00
# Git Code of Conduct
This code of conduct outlines our expectations for participants within
the Git community, as well as steps for reporting unacceptable behavior.
We are committed to providing a welcoming and inspiring community for
all and expect our code of conduct to be honored. Anyone who violates
this code of conduct may be banned from the community.
## Our Pledge
We as members, contributors, and leaders pledge to make participation in our
community a harassment-free experience for everyone, regardless of age, body
size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender
identity and expression, level of experience, education, socio-economic status,
nationality, personal appearance, race, religion, or sexual identity
and orientation.
We pledge to act and interact in ways that contribute to an open, welcoming,
diverse, inclusive, and healthy community.
add a Code of Conduct document We've never had a formally written Code of Conduct document. Though it has been discussed off and on over the years, for the most part the behavior on the mailing list has been good enough that nobody felt the need to push one forward. However, even if there aren't specific problems now, it's a good idea to have a document: - it puts everybody on the same page with respect to expectations. This might avoid poor behavior, but also makes it easier to handle it if it does happen. - it publicly advertises that good conduct is important to us and will be enforced, which may make some people more comfortable with joining our community - it may be a good time to cement our expectations when things are quiet, since it gives everybody some distance rather than focusing on a current contentious issue This patch adapts the Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct. As opposed to writing our own from scratch, this uses common and well-accepted language, and strikes a good balance between illustrating expectations and avoiding a laundry list of behaviors. It's also the same document used by the Git for Windows project. The text is taken mostly verbatim from: https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-conduct.html I also stole a very nice introductory paragraph from the Git for Windows version of the file. There are a few subtle points, though: - the document refers to "the project maintainers". For the code, we generally only consider there to be one maintainer: Junio C Hamano. But for dealing with community issues, it makes sense to involve more people to spread the responsibility. I've listed the project committee address of git@sfconservancy.org as the contact point. - the document mentions banning from the community, both in the intro paragraph and in "Our Responsibilities". The exact mechanism here is left vague. I can imagine it might start with social enforcement (not accepting patches, ignoring emails) and could escalate to technical measures if necessary (asking vger admins to block an address). It probably make sense _not_ to get too specific at this point, and deal with specifics as they come up. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Acked-by: CB Bailey <cb@hashpling.org> Acked-by: Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org> Acked-by: Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@google.com> Acked-by: Garima Singh <garimasigit@gmail.com> Acked-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> Acked-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Acked-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Acked-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> Acked-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> Acked-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> Acked-by: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk> Acked-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> Acked-by: Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com> Acked-by: Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@gmail.com> Acked-by: William Baker <williamtbakeremail@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2019-09-24 09:44:54 +03:00
## Our Standards
Examples of behavior that contributes to a positive environment for our
community include:
add a Code of Conduct document We've never had a formally written Code of Conduct document. Though it has been discussed off and on over the years, for the most part the behavior on the mailing list has been good enough that nobody felt the need to push one forward. However, even if there aren't specific problems now, it's a good idea to have a document: - it puts everybody on the same page with respect to expectations. This might avoid poor behavior, but also makes it easier to handle it if it does happen. - it publicly advertises that good conduct is important to us and will be enforced, which may make some people more comfortable with joining our community - it may be a good time to cement our expectations when things are quiet, since it gives everybody some distance rather than focusing on a current contentious issue This patch adapts the Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct. As opposed to writing our own from scratch, this uses common and well-accepted language, and strikes a good balance between illustrating expectations and avoiding a laundry list of behaviors. It's also the same document used by the Git for Windows project. The text is taken mostly verbatim from: https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-conduct.html I also stole a very nice introductory paragraph from the Git for Windows version of the file. There are a few subtle points, though: - the document refers to "the project maintainers". For the code, we generally only consider there to be one maintainer: Junio C Hamano. But for dealing with community issues, it makes sense to involve more people to spread the responsibility. I've listed the project committee address of git@sfconservancy.org as the contact point. - the document mentions banning from the community, both in the intro paragraph and in "Our Responsibilities". The exact mechanism here is left vague. I can imagine it might start with social enforcement (not accepting patches, ignoring emails) and could escalate to technical measures if necessary (asking vger admins to block an address). It probably make sense _not_ to get too specific at this point, and deal with specifics as they come up. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Acked-by: CB Bailey <cb@hashpling.org> Acked-by: Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org> Acked-by: Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@google.com> Acked-by: Garima Singh <garimasigit@gmail.com> Acked-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> Acked-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Acked-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Acked-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> Acked-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> Acked-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> Acked-by: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk> Acked-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> Acked-by: Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com> Acked-by: Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@gmail.com> Acked-by: William Baker <williamtbakeremail@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2019-09-24 09:44:54 +03:00
* Demonstrating empathy and kindness toward other people
* Being respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences
* Giving and gracefully accepting constructive feedback
* Accepting responsibility and apologizing to those affected by our mistakes,
and learning from the experience
* Focusing on what is best not just for us as individuals, but for the
overall community
add a Code of Conduct document We've never had a formally written Code of Conduct document. Though it has been discussed off and on over the years, for the most part the behavior on the mailing list has been good enough that nobody felt the need to push one forward. However, even if there aren't specific problems now, it's a good idea to have a document: - it puts everybody on the same page with respect to expectations. This might avoid poor behavior, but also makes it easier to handle it if it does happen. - it publicly advertises that good conduct is important to us and will be enforced, which may make some people more comfortable with joining our community - it may be a good time to cement our expectations when things are quiet, since it gives everybody some distance rather than focusing on a current contentious issue This patch adapts the Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct. As opposed to writing our own from scratch, this uses common and well-accepted language, and strikes a good balance between illustrating expectations and avoiding a laundry list of behaviors. It's also the same document used by the Git for Windows project. The text is taken mostly verbatim from: https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-conduct.html I also stole a very nice introductory paragraph from the Git for Windows version of the file. There are a few subtle points, though: - the document refers to "the project maintainers". For the code, we generally only consider there to be one maintainer: Junio C Hamano. But for dealing with community issues, it makes sense to involve more people to spread the responsibility. I've listed the project committee address of git@sfconservancy.org as the contact point. - the document mentions banning from the community, both in the intro paragraph and in "Our Responsibilities". The exact mechanism here is left vague. I can imagine it might start with social enforcement (not accepting patches, ignoring emails) and could escalate to technical measures if necessary (asking vger admins to block an address). It probably make sense _not_ to get too specific at this point, and deal with specifics as they come up. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Acked-by: CB Bailey <cb@hashpling.org> Acked-by: Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org> Acked-by: Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@google.com> Acked-by: Garima Singh <garimasigit@gmail.com> Acked-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> Acked-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Acked-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Acked-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> Acked-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> Acked-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> Acked-by: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk> Acked-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> Acked-by: Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com> Acked-by: Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@gmail.com> Acked-by: William Baker <williamtbakeremail@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2019-09-24 09:44:54 +03:00
Examples of unacceptable behavior include:
add a Code of Conduct document We've never had a formally written Code of Conduct document. Though it has been discussed off and on over the years, for the most part the behavior on the mailing list has been good enough that nobody felt the need to push one forward. However, even if there aren't specific problems now, it's a good idea to have a document: - it puts everybody on the same page with respect to expectations. This might avoid poor behavior, but also makes it easier to handle it if it does happen. - it publicly advertises that good conduct is important to us and will be enforced, which may make some people more comfortable with joining our community - it may be a good time to cement our expectations when things are quiet, since it gives everybody some distance rather than focusing on a current contentious issue This patch adapts the Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct. As opposed to writing our own from scratch, this uses common and well-accepted language, and strikes a good balance between illustrating expectations and avoiding a laundry list of behaviors. It's also the same document used by the Git for Windows project. The text is taken mostly verbatim from: https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-conduct.html I also stole a very nice introductory paragraph from the Git for Windows version of the file. There are a few subtle points, though: - the document refers to "the project maintainers". For the code, we generally only consider there to be one maintainer: Junio C Hamano. But for dealing with community issues, it makes sense to involve more people to spread the responsibility. I've listed the project committee address of git@sfconservancy.org as the contact point. - the document mentions banning from the community, both in the intro paragraph and in "Our Responsibilities". The exact mechanism here is left vague. I can imagine it might start with social enforcement (not accepting patches, ignoring emails) and could escalate to technical measures if necessary (asking vger admins to block an address). It probably make sense _not_ to get too specific at this point, and deal with specifics as they come up. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Acked-by: CB Bailey <cb@hashpling.org> Acked-by: Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org> Acked-by: Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@google.com> Acked-by: Garima Singh <garimasigit@gmail.com> Acked-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> Acked-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Acked-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Acked-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> Acked-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> Acked-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> Acked-by: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk> Acked-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> Acked-by: Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com> Acked-by: Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@gmail.com> Acked-by: William Baker <williamtbakeremail@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2019-09-24 09:44:54 +03:00
* The use of sexualized language or imagery, and sexual attention or
advances of any kind
* Trolling, insulting or derogatory comments, and personal or political attacks
add a Code of Conduct document We've never had a formally written Code of Conduct document. Though it has been discussed off and on over the years, for the most part the behavior on the mailing list has been good enough that nobody felt the need to push one forward. However, even if there aren't specific problems now, it's a good idea to have a document: - it puts everybody on the same page with respect to expectations. This might avoid poor behavior, but also makes it easier to handle it if it does happen. - it publicly advertises that good conduct is important to us and will be enforced, which may make some people more comfortable with joining our community - it may be a good time to cement our expectations when things are quiet, since it gives everybody some distance rather than focusing on a current contentious issue This patch adapts the Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct. As opposed to writing our own from scratch, this uses common and well-accepted language, and strikes a good balance between illustrating expectations and avoiding a laundry list of behaviors. It's also the same document used by the Git for Windows project. The text is taken mostly verbatim from: https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-conduct.html I also stole a very nice introductory paragraph from the Git for Windows version of the file. There are a few subtle points, though: - the document refers to "the project maintainers". For the code, we generally only consider there to be one maintainer: Junio C Hamano. But for dealing with community issues, it makes sense to involve more people to spread the responsibility. I've listed the project committee address of git@sfconservancy.org as the contact point. - the document mentions banning from the community, both in the intro paragraph and in "Our Responsibilities". The exact mechanism here is left vague. I can imagine it might start with social enforcement (not accepting patches, ignoring emails) and could escalate to technical measures if necessary (asking vger admins to block an address). It probably make sense _not_ to get too specific at this point, and deal with specifics as they come up. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Acked-by: CB Bailey <cb@hashpling.org> Acked-by: Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org> Acked-by: Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@google.com> Acked-by: Garima Singh <garimasigit@gmail.com> Acked-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> Acked-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Acked-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Acked-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> Acked-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> Acked-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> Acked-by: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk> Acked-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> Acked-by: Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com> Acked-by: Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@gmail.com> Acked-by: William Baker <williamtbakeremail@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2019-09-24 09:44:54 +03:00
* Public or private harassment
* Publishing others' private information, such as a physical or email
address, without their explicit permission
add a Code of Conduct document We've never had a formally written Code of Conduct document. Though it has been discussed off and on over the years, for the most part the behavior on the mailing list has been good enough that nobody felt the need to push one forward. However, even if there aren't specific problems now, it's a good idea to have a document: - it puts everybody on the same page with respect to expectations. This might avoid poor behavior, but also makes it easier to handle it if it does happen. - it publicly advertises that good conduct is important to us and will be enforced, which may make some people more comfortable with joining our community - it may be a good time to cement our expectations when things are quiet, since it gives everybody some distance rather than focusing on a current contentious issue This patch adapts the Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct. As opposed to writing our own from scratch, this uses common and well-accepted language, and strikes a good balance between illustrating expectations and avoiding a laundry list of behaviors. It's also the same document used by the Git for Windows project. The text is taken mostly verbatim from: https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-conduct.html I also stole a very nice introductory paragraph from the Git for Windows version of the file. There are a few subtle points, though: - the document refers to "the project maintainers". For the code, we generally only consider there to be one maintainer: Junio C Hamano. But for dealing with community issues, it makes sense to involve more people to spread the responsibility. I've listed the project committee address of git@sfconservancy.org as the contact point. - the document mentions banning from the community, both in the intro paragraph and in "Our Responsibilities". The exact mechanism here is left vague. I can imagine it might start with social enforcement (not accepting patches, ignoring emails) and could escalate to technical measures if necessary (asking vger admins to block an address). It probably make sense _not_ to get too specific at this point, and deal with specifics as they come up. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Acked-by: CB Bailey <cb@hashpling.org> Acked-by: Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org> Acked-by: Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@google.com> Acked-by: Garima Singh <garimasigit@gmail.com> Acked-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> Acked-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Acked-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Acked-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> Acked-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> Acked-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> Acked-by: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk> Acked-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> Acked-by: Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com> Acked-by: Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@gmail.com> Acked-by: William Baker <williamtbakeremail@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2019-09-24 09:44:54 +03:00
* Other conduct which could reasonably be considered inappropriate in a
professional setting
## Enforcement Responsibilities
add a Code of Conduct document We've never had a formally written Code of Conduct document. Though it has been discussed off and on over the years, for the most part the behavior on the mailing list has been good enough that nobody felt the need to push one forward. However, even if there aren't specific problems now, it's a good idea to have a document: - it puts everybody on the same page with respect to expectations. This might avoid poor behavior, but also makes it easier to handle it if it does happen. - it publicly advertises that good conduct is important to us and will be enforced, which may make some people more comfortable with joining our community - it may be a good time to cement our expectations when things are quiet, since it gives everybody some distance rather than focusing on a current contentious issue This patch adapts the Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct. As opposed to writing our own from scratch, this uses common and well-accepted language, and strikes a good balance between illustrating expectations and avoiding a laundry list of behaviors. It's also the same document used by the Git for Windows project. The text is taken mostly verbatim from: https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-conduct.html I also stole a very nice introductory paragraph from the Git for Windows version of the file. There are a few subtle points, though: - the document refers to "the project maintainers". For the code, we generally only consider there to be one maintainer: Junio C Hamano. But for dealing with community issues, it makes sense to involve more people to spread the responsibility. I've listed the project committee address of git@sfconservancy.org as the contact point. - the document mentions banning from the community, both in the intro paragraph and in "Our Responsibilities". The exact mechanism here is left vague. I can imagine it might start with social enforcement (not accepting patches, ignoring emails) and could escalate to technical measures if necessary (asking vger admins to block an address). It probably make sense _not_ to get too specific at this point, and deal with specifics as they come up. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Acked-by: CB Bailey <cb@hashpling.org> Acked-by: Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org> Acked-by: Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@google.com> Acked-by: Garima Singh <garimasigit@gmail.com> Acked-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> Acked-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Acked-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Acked-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> Acked-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> Acked-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> Acked-by: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk> Acked-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> Acked-by: Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com> Acked-by: Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@gmail.com> Acked-by: William Baker <williamtbakeremail@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2019-09-24 09:44:54 +03:00
Community leaders are responsible for clarifying and enforcing our standards of
acceptable behavior and will take appropriate and fair corrective action in
response to any behavior that they deem inappropriate, threatening, offensive,
or harmful.
add a Code of Conduct document We've never had a formally written Code of Conduct document. Though it has been discussed off and on over the years, for the most part the behavior on the mailing list has been good enough that nobody felt the need to push one forward. However, even if there aren't specific problems now, it's a good idea to have a document: - it puts everybody on the same page with respect to expectations. This might avoid poor behavior, but also makes it easier to handle it if it does happen. - it publicly advertises that good conduct is important to us and will be enforced, which may make some people more comfortable with joining our community - it may be a good time to cement our expectations when things are quiet, since it gives everybody some distance rather than focusing on a current contentious issue This patch adapts the Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct. As opposed to writing our own from scratch, this uses common and well-accepted language, and strikes a good balance between illustrating expectations and avoiding a laundry list of behaviors. It's also the same document used by the Git for Windows project. The text is taken mostly verbatim from: https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-conduct.html I also stole a very nice introductory paragraph from the Git for Windows version of the file. There are a few subtle points, though: - the document refers to "the project maintainers". For the code, we generally only consider there to be one maintainer: Junio C Hamano. But for dealing with community issues, it makes sense to involve more people to spread the responsibility. I've listed the project committee address of git@sfconservancy.org as the contact point. - the document mentions banning from the community, both in the intro paragraph and in "Our Responsibilities". The exact mechanism here is left vague. I can imagine it might start with social enforcement (not accepting patches, ignoring emails) and could escalate to technical measures if necessary (asking vger admins to block an address). It probably make sense _not_ to get too specific at this point, and deal with specifics as they come up. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Acked-by: CB Bailey <cb@hashpling.org> Acked-by: Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org> Acked-by: Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@google.com> Acked-by: Garima Singh <garimasigit@gmail.com> Acked-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> Acked-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Acked-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Acked-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> Acked-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> Acked-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> Acked-by: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk> Acked-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> Acked-by: Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com> Acked-by: Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@gmail.com> Acked-by: William Baker <williamtbakeremail@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2019-09-24 09:44:54 +03:00
Community leaders have the right and responsibility to remove, edit, or reject
comments, commits, code, wiki edits, issues, and other contributions that are
not aligned to this Code of Conduct, and will communicate reasons for moderation
decisions when appropriate.
add a Code of Conduct document We've never had a formally written Code of Conduct document. Though it has been discussed off and on over the years, for the most part the behavior on the mailing list has been good enough that nobody felt the need to push one forward. However, even if there aren't specific problems now, it's a good idea to have a document: - it puts everybody on the same page with respect to expectations. This might avoid poor behavior, but also makes it easier to handle it if it does happen. - it publicly advertises that good conduct is important to us and will be enforced, which may make some people more comfortable with joining our community - it may be a good time to cement our expectations when things are quiet, since it gives everybody some distance rather than focusing on a current contentious issue This patch adapts the Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct. As opposed to writing our own from scratch, this uses common and well-accepted language, and strikes a good balance between illustrating expectations and avoiding a laundry list of behaviors. It's also the same document used by the Git for Windows project. The text is taken mostly verbatim from: https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-conduct.html I also stole a very nice introductory paragraph from the Git for Windows version of the file. There are a few subtle points, though: - the document refers to "the project maintainers". For the code, we generally only consider there to be one maintainer: Junio C Hamano. But for dealing with community issues, it makes sense to involve more people to spread the responsibility. I've listed the project committee address of git@sfconservancy.org as the contact point. - the document mentions banning from the community, both in the intro paragraph and in "Our Responsibilities". The exact mechanism here is left vague. I can imagine it might start with social enforcement (not accepting patches, ignoring emails) and could escalate to technical measures if necessary (asking vger admins to block an address). It probably make sense _not_ to get too specific at this point, and deal with specifics as they come up. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Acked-by: CB Bailey <cb@hashpling.org> Acked-by: Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org> Acked-by: Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@google.com> Acked-by: Garima Singh <garimasigit@gmail.com> Acked-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> Acked-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Acked-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Acked-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> Acked-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> Acked-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> Acked-by: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk> Acked-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> Acked-by: Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com> Acked-by: Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@gmail.com> Acked-by: William Baker <williamtbakeremail@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2019-09-24 09:44:54 +03:00
## Scope
This Code of Conduct applies within all community spaces, and also applies when
an individual is officially representing the community in public spaces.
Examples of representing our community include using an official e-mail address,
posting via an official social media account, or acting as an appointed
representative at an online or offline event.
add a Code of Conduct document We've never had a formally written Code of Conduct document. Though it has been discussed off and on over the years, for the most part the behavior on the mailing list has been good enough that nobody felt the need to push one forward. However, even if there aren't specific problems now, it's a good idea to have a document: - it puts everybody on the same page with respect to expectations. This might avoid poor behavior, but also makes it easier to handle it if it does happen. - it publicly advertises that good conduct is important to us and will be enforced, which may make some people more comfortable with joining our community - it may be a good time to cement our expectations when things are quiet, since it gives everybody some distance rather than focusing on a current contentious issue This patch adapts the Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct. As opposed to writing our own from scratch, this uses common and well-accepted language, and strikes a good balance between illustrating expectations and avoiding a laundry list of behaviors. It's also the same document used by the Git for Windows project. The text is taken mostly verbatim from: https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-conduct.html I also stole a very nice introductory paragraph from the Git for Windows version of the file. There are a few subtle points, though: - the document refers to "the project maintainers". For the code, we generally only consider there to be one maintainer: Junio C Hamano. But for dealing with community issues, it makes sense to involve more people to spread the responsibility. I've listed the project committee address of git@sfconservancy.org as the contact point. - the document mentions banning from the community, both in the intro paragraph and in "Our Responsibilities". The exact mechanism here is left vague. I can imagine it might start with social enforcement (not accepting patches, ignoring emails) and could escalate to technical measures if necessary (asking vger admins to block an address). It probably make sense _not_ to get too specific at this point, and deal with specifics as they come up. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Acked-by: CB Bailey <cb@hashpling.org> Acked-by: Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org> Acked-by: Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@google.com> Acked-by: Garima Singh <garimasigit@gmail.com> Acked-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> Acked-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Acked-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Acked-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> Acked-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> Acked-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> Acked-by: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk> Acked-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> Acked-by: Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com> Acked-by: Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@gmail.com> Acked-by: William Baker <williamtbakeremail@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2019-09-24 09:44:54 +03:00
## Enforcement
Instances of abusive, harassing, or otherwise unacceptable behavior may be
reported to the community leaders responsible for enforcement at
git@sfconservancy.org, or individually:
- Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
- Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com>
- Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
- Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
All complaints will be reviewed and investigated promptly and fairly.
All community leaders are obligated to respect the privacy and security of the
reporter of any incident.
## Enforcement Guidelines
Community leaders will follow these Community Impact Guidelines in determining
the consequences for any action they deem in violation of this Code of Conduct:
### 1. Correction
**Community Impact**: Use of inappropriate language or other behavior deemed
unprofessional or unwelcome in the community.
**Consequence**: A private, written warning from community leaders, providing
clarity around the nature of the violation and an explanation of why the
behavior was inappropriate. A public apology may be requested.
### 2. Warning
**Community Impact**: A violation through a single incident or series
of actions.
**Consequence**: A warning with consequences for continued behavior. No
interaction with the people involved, including unsolicited interaction with
those enforcing the Code of Conduct, for a specified period of time. This
includes avoiding interactions in community spaces as well as external channels
like social media. Violating these terms may lead to a temporary or
permanent ban.
### 3. Temporary Ban
**Community Impact**: A serious violation of community standards, including
sustained inappropriate behavior.
**Consequence**: A temporary ban from any sort of interaction or public
communication with the community for a specified period of time. No public or
private interaction with the people involved, including unsolicited interaction
with those enforcing the Code of Conduct, is allowed during this period.
Violating these terms may lead to a permanent ban.
### 4. Permanent Ban
**Community Impact**: Demonstrating a pattern of violation of community
standards, including sustained inappropriate behavior, harassment of an
individual, or aggression toward or disparagement of classes of individuals.
**Consequence**: A permanent ban from any sort of public interaction within
the community.
add a Code of Conduct document We've never had a formally written Code of Conduct document. Though it has been discussed off and on over the years, for the most part the behavior on the mailing list has been good enough that nobody felt the need to push one forward. However, even if there aren't specific problems now, it's a good idea to have a document: - it puts everybody on the same page with respect to expectations. This might avoid poor behavior, but also makes it easier to handle it if it does happen. - it publicly advertises that good conduct is important to us and will be enforced, which may make some people more comfortable with joining our community - it may be a good time to cement our expectations when things are quiet, since it gives everybody some distance rather than focusing on a current contentious issue This patch adapts the Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct. As opposed to writing our own from scratch, this uses common and well-accepted language, and strikes a good balance between illustrating expectations and avoiding a laundry list of behaviors. It's also the same document used by the Git for Windows project. The text is taken mostly verbatim from: https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-conduct.html I also stole a very nice introductory paragraph from the Git for Windows version of the file. There are a few subtle points, though: - the document refers to "the project maintainers". For the code, we generally only consider there to be one maintainer: Junio C Hamano. But for dealing with community issues, it makes sense to involve more people to spread the responsibility. I've listed the project committee address of git@sfconservancy.org as the contact point. - the document mentions banning from the community, both in the intro paragraph and in "Our Responsibilities". The exact mechanism here is left vague. I can imagine it might start with social enforcement (not accepting patches, ignoring emails) and could escalate to technical measures if necessary (asking vger admins to block an address). It probably make sense _not_ to get too specific at this point, and deal with specifics as they come up. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Acked-by: CB Bailey <cb@hashpling.org> Acked-by: Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org> Acked-by: Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@google.com> Acked-by: Garima Singh <garimasigit@gmail.com> Acked-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> Acked-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Acked-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Acked-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> Acked-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> Acked-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> Acked-by: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk> Acked-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> Acked-by: Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com> Acked-by: Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@gmail.com> Acked-by: William Baker <williamtbakeremail@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2019-09-24 09:44:54 +03:00
## Attribution
This Code of Conduct is adapted from the [Contributor Covenant][homepage],
version 2.0, available at
[https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/2/0/code_of_conduct.html][v2.0].
Community Impact Guidelines were inspired by
[Mozilla's code of conduct enforcement ladder][Mozilla CoC].
For answers to common questions about this code of conduct, see the FAQ at
[https://www.contributor-covenant.org/faq][FAQ]. Translations are available
at [https://www.contributor-covenant.org/translations][translations].
add a Code of Conduct document We've never had a formally written Code of Conduct document. Though it has been discussed off and on over the years, for the most part the behavior on the mailing list has been good enough that nobody felt the need to push one forward. However, even if there aren't specific problems now, it's a good idea to have a document: - it puts everybody on the same page with respect to expectations. This might avoid poor behavior, but also makes it easier to handle it if it does happen. - it publicly advertises that good conduct is important to us and will be enforced, which may make some people more comfortable with joining our community - it may be a good time to cement our expectations when things are quiet, since it gives everybody some distance rather than focusing on a current contentious issue This patch adapts the Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct. As opposed to writing our own from scratch, this uses common and well-accepted language, and strikes a good balance between illustrating expectations and avoiding a laundry list of behaviors. It's also the same document used by the Git for Windows project. The text is taken mostly verbatim from: https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-conduct.html I also stole a very nice introductory paragraph from the Git for Windows version of the file. There are a few subtle points, though: - the document refers to "the project maintainers". For the code, we generally only consider there to be one maintainer: Junio C Hamano. But for dealing with community issues, it makes sense to involve more people to spread the responsibility. I've listed the project committee address of git@sfconservancy.org as the contact point. - the document mentions banning from the community, both in the intro paragraph and in "Our Responsibilities". The exact mechanism here is left vague. I can imagine it might start with social enforcement (not accepting patches, ignoring emails) and could escalate to technical measures if necessary (asking vger admins to block an address). It probably make sense _not_ to get too specific at this point, and deal with specifics as they come up. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Acked-by: CB Bailey <cb@hashpling.org> Acked-by: Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org> Acked-by: Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@google.com> Acked-by: Garima Singh <garimasigit@gmail.com> Acked-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> Acked-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Acked-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Acked-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> Acked-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> Acked-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> Acked-by: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk> Acked-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> Acked-by: Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com> Acked-by: Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@gmail.com> Acked-by: William Baker <williamtbakeremail@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2019-09-24 09:44:54 +03:00
[homepage]: https://www.contributor-covenant.org
[v2.0]: https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/2/0/code_of_conduct.html
[Mozilla CoC]: https://github.com/mozilla/diversity
[FAQ]: https://www.contributor-covenant.org/faq
[translations]: https://www.contributor-covenant.org/translations
add a Code of Conduct document We've never had a formally written Code of Conduct document. Though it has been discussed off and on over the years, for the most part the behavior on the mailing list has been good enough that nobody felt the need to push one forward. However, even if there aren't specific problems now, it's a good idea to have a document: - it puts everybody on the same page with respect to expectations. This might avoid poor behavior, but also makes it easier to handle it if it does happen. - it publicly advertises that good conduct is important to us and will be enforced, which may make some people more comfortable with joining our community - it may be a good time to cement our expectations when things are quiet, since it gives everybody some distance rather than focusing on a current contentious issue This patch adapts the Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct. As opposed to writing our own from scratch, this uses common and well-accepted language, and strikes a good balance between illustrating expectations and avoiding a laundry list of behaviors. It's also the same document used by the Git for Windows project. The text is taken mostly verbatim from: https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-conduct.html I also stole a very nice introductory paragraph from the Git for Windows version of the file. There are a few subtle points, though: - the document refers to "the project maintainers". For the code, we generally only consider there to be one maintainer: Junio C Hamano. But for dealing with community issues, it makes sense to involve more people to spread the responsibility. I've listed the project committee address of git@sfconservancy.org as the contact point. - the document mentions banning from the community, both in the intro paragraph and in "Our Responsibilities". The exact mechanism here is left vague. I can imagine it might start with social enforcement (not accepting patches, ignoring emails) and could escalate to technical measures if necessary (asking vger admins to block an address). It probably make sense _not_ to get too specific at this point, and deal with specifics as they come up. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Acked-by: CB Bailey <cb@hashpling.org> Acked-by: Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org> Acked-by: Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@google.com> Acked-by: Garima Singh <garimasigit@gmail.com> Acked-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> Acked-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Acked-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Acked-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> Acked-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> Acked-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> Acked-by: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk> Acked-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> Acked-by: Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com> Acked-by: Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@gmail.com> Acked-by: William Baker <williamtbakeremail@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2019-09-24 09:44:54 +03:00