RE: [gentoo-council] Extent of Code of Conduct enforcement

[Chrissy Fullam]

> Ferris McCormick wrote:
> > On Tue, 2008-07-22 at 02:34 -0400, Mark Loeser wrote:
> > > Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o> said:
> > > Can people be entirely banned from Gentoo?
> >
> > > - Why would we do it?
> > Because they are damaging the community and driving possible
> > contributors aways.
> >
> Let me respond to this specifically.  I have pretty strong views on this,
> and I suspect they might reflect a minority opinion.
>
> I'm going to divide this into two cases, because I think the first one is
> easy.  First case is developers who leave or threaten to leave giving the
> reason that "XXX (a developer or user) drove them away because of ...".
> Second case is a sponsor who threatens to withdraw support "unless
> something is done about XXX."
>
> In the first case, my reaction is absolute.  The developer who threatens
> to leave because of someone else is (1) making the judgment call that we
> care if he leaves; (2) Is resorting to extortion to get rid of someone
> else (or reign someone else in or whatever).  At that point, I'd wish him
> well in his future endeavors and start retirement process.  I view giving
> in to such a threat as at least as harmful as whatever or whoever
> triggered it in the first place.  This is based on my own background and
> experiences, and others no doubt react differently.

(1) I am bothered that as a member of devrel you state something that
implies devrel doesn't care if a developer leaves. While we have personal
opinions of people, devrel is expected to leave them at the door to our
jobs. I care when people leave, I care to know why they leave (this gives us
grounds for improvement which is what we should be seeking), and I care that
people do what is really best for them.
(2) You are making assumptions that people are resorting to extortion. I've
known people who simply said I'm through and leaving, here is why, and they
did so not to have someone try to win them back but rather so that the
appropriate people knew the areas that may require investigation. Not
everyone is a malicious ass trying to take advantage of people or ruin other
people.

> Now, there is a variation on this:  The developer who resigns, citing
> abuse as the reason.  Here, the process has broken down.  Believe it or
> not, devrel and userrel will work with problems like this if we know there
> are such problems to address.

We are here to help, this is so very true, but devrel also recognizes the
stereo type that we are labeled with as a result of the past actions of a
variety of people within devrel, that being ineffective and not desiring to
do anything. This is not the case of devrel today. We will do what it takes
to appropriately address issues and if someone doesn't desire to participate
in devrel then they are welcome to seek out other areas of Gentoo in which
to participate.

> For example, if you want me involved, best
> is to contact me personally or open a bug assigned to me.
> If you want someone else, do whatever that person prefers.

If you contact a member of devrel directly then such a person will not be
acting as a devrel official but rather as a peer seeking to help. This is
quite alright and an option that anyone can exercise. The official means of
seeking devrel assistance is quoted from our policy as follows:

"To involve Developer Relations in your issue please send an email to
devrel@g.o or open a Bug and assign it to Developer Relations; either
is acceptable. Please note that opening a bug is not necessary for
mediation, however the developer may open a bug if he/she wishes to do so;
opening a bug is mandatory if mediation efforts fail."

> The second case is more delicate.  It is still a form of extortion, but
> conceivably with merit.  I think the resolution requires negotiation with
> the sponsor and the "problem child".  If we can reach no agreement, I
> suppose we have to do what seems best for the community.  That will always
> be a decision depending on each circumstance.

A sponsor saying that they will withdraw unless we address XYZ is welcome to
do just that. They are sponsors and not legally bound to us for a specified
period of time. If the mutually beneficial relationship is no longer
mutually beneficial then it indeed should end if there is no agreeable
resolution. For example, I cannot condone firing a developer who we feel has
not done something worthy of such punishment just to please a sponsor.
However I have no objection to a sponsor stating something that causes us to
review the situation and determine whether we do in fact agree that such a
statement is in the best interest of Gentoo, just such a decision should not
be made solely to keep a sponsor. I realize my opinion may not be popular
there, but it's my own. ;-)


Kind regards,
Christina Fullam
Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | Gentoo Public Relations