That CoC is utter bullshit, to be frank.
Am 05.01.2016 um 23:15 schrieb Garrett D'Amore <garrett@xxxxxxxxxx>:
Normally I try to avoid getting mired into political debates, but I’m
currently thinking of adding a standard CoC to the nanomsg source repo.
Basically my proposal is to add this:
to the nanomsg repo. (Updated with email addresses of course).
I do have my doubts about the efficacy of CoCs, and I don’t think we have a
problem — but if we did we might not know it — I suspect that all the current
contributors are male.
The concept of setting a stake in the ground for the future, and presenting
our “community” (are we even that big yet?) as welcoming and inclusive, and
setting a standard tone for acceptable behavior, seems like something we
ought to embrace.
The cost to the project is low, at least at this point, since I don’t think
we have any of the toxicity that has plagued other open source projects. But
the potential benefit of attracting additional contributors seems worth it to
Additionally, doing this *now* is something that can be done
non-controversially (I hope). If we later have a problem and don’t have a
CoC, the consequences for the project may be worse (in several dimensions).
That said, Martin has the trademark for nanomsg still. If he strenuously
objects I’ll shelve the proposal. If anyone else has strenuous objections to
this, please let me know privately, with specific rational reasons for your
To be clear, there’s been no past need for any kind of enforcement here, and
I hope such will never occur, and any kind of corrective response to any
future misbehavior is something I’d like to limit except in the face of
And I hope the community will hold me to the same standard of professionalism.