On Sun, Feb 28, 2016, 12:02 Georg Brandl email@example.com wrote:
On 02/28/2016 08:10 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
Can *anyone* take it upon themselves to (let's say) say "Brett, you unilaterally changed the policy with no
or consultation and just four minutes notice. That is unspeakably
and total jerk behaviour, so under your own rules you're out of
I'm not just making a rhetorical point. I wouldn't accept that sort
unilateral behaviour from my work colleagues.
It wasn't a unilateral decision. If it was then I would have just done it without opening an issue or bringing it up here. I mentioned it here
case someone might get upset by it (which obviously happened).
FWIW, Eric Smith and myself (co-"owners" of the mailing list) supported this when Brett asked.
I think Steven's objection was me wanting to state in the devguide that core devs would adhere to the CoC in all Python-related interactions in the community regardless of whether that interaction explicitly occurred under the purview of the CoC, which is a stronger statement than just this mailing list being under the CoC.
I hope, Steven, you're by now convinced that this wasn't a cloak-and-dagger operation (really, for volunteer work there is no such thing as "business hours").
Neither is it a unique thing for a python.org mailing list. This is especially important: what is so different about python-ideas that it needs the CoC, while -committers doesn't? Much better to be consistent and to have the same standards applied to every list (eventually).
python-committers mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/