On Sun, Feb 28, 2016, 12:02 Georg Brandl <g.brandl@gmx.net> 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 discussion
>     or consultation and just four minutes notice. That is unspeakably rude
>     and total jerk behaviour, so under your own rules you're out of here"?
>     I'm not just making a rhetorical point. I wouldn't accept that sort of
>     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 just in
> 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

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
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/