[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Contributor covenant
From: |
Ricardo Wurmus |
Subject: |
Re: Contributor covenant |
Date: |
Wed, 9 Dec 2015 16:49:40 +0100 |
User-agent: |
mu4e 0.9.13; emacs 24.5.1 |
Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden> writes:
> I don’t know about you, but I think this growing community here has
> always been very kind, welcoming, and helpful, IOW: awesome.
Indeed! I’d like to say that this community is the best of any free
software project I’ve ever contributed to. Thanks to everyone for
keeping it friendly, constructive, and welcoming!
> In commit e15fcdd, I added a ‘CODE-OF-CONDUCT’ file taken from
> <http://contributor-covenant.org/>, which is essentially a way of
> telling the lurkers out there: yes, we do our best to be welcoming and
> we’re committed to doing so, so join us! The address@hidden
> address it mentions is currently an alias for address@hidden (though I’d
> like it to become more than just me!).
Thank your for this!
The code of conduct itself sounds good; but the sentence in the manual
is a little hard to read and a little meandering, in my opinion.
> +In the interest of welcoming everyone who thinks this is a great project
> +to contribute to---which it is, indeed!---contributors express their
> +commitment to providing a warm, friendly, and harassment-free experience
> +by agreeing to our ``Contributor Covenant'', adapted from
> address@hidden://contributor-covenant.org/}, and which can be found in the
> address@hidden file in the source tree.
> +
I find it hard to suggest better wording, but I think there’s a lot in
this sentence and it might be better to split it up or simplify it a
little. Maybe splitting it into two sentences would be clearer? E.g.:
> We welcome everyone to contribute to this project. To maintain(?) a
> warm, friendly, and harassment-free experience, contributers agree to
> our ``Contributor Covenant'' (adapted from
> @url{http://contributor-covenant.org/}), which can be found in the
> @file{CODE-OF-CONDUCT} file in the source tree.
Admittedly it doesn’t have the charms of the original version, but I
find the latter somewhat clearer. What do you think?
~~ Ricardo