[Development] QUIP 12: Code of Conduct

Thu Oct 25 15:05:09 CEST 2018

> -----Original Message-----
> From: NIkolai Marchenko <enmarantispam at gmail.com>
> Sent: Thursday, 25 October 2018 2:21 PM
> To: Tor Arne Vestbø <Tor.arne.Vestbo at qt.io>
> Cc: Mitch Curtis <mitch.curtis at qt.io>; Konstantin Tokarev
> <annulen at yandex.ru>; Qt development mailing list <development at qt-
> project.org>
> Subject: Re: [Development] QUIP 12: Code of Conduct
> 
> >  To answer your question: in my experience, nothing happens. They
> continue being a rude arse because:
> And that's my problem with this code of conduct.
> If it's unenforceable then this should not be Code but Guidelines.
> If it's enforceable it should first be decided what is going to happen in the
> case I described.

Call it whatever you like. If it were up to me I'd call it "Things Your Parents Should Have Taught You", just so that people can't attack it based on the boilerplate text that was copied in from that website.

> > This is a real problem in this project that not only makes it a less than great
> place to work, but is also indirectly affecting the quality of the code
> Multiple people have alrady asked for examples of what the code is trying to
> solve.
> If you have those, we'd like to hear about these exact cases.

- If someone asks a question, don't call their question stupid. This makes them far less likely to ask questions. Hopefully I don't need to tell you how important asking questions is for learning. If you care about code quality, you *want* people asking questions.
- If someone pushes a patch, don't call their patch stupid. The person wrote that patch because they're trying to make Qt better, so even if you're "just" attacking the patch itself and not the person directly, you're still going to make them feel like crap. Review a patch by offering constructive feedback. You don't have to be super polite if that's not who you are, but you also don't need to be rude. If you really care about what you're doing, then why not focus that awf--delightful quirky attitude into objective feedback? I left a comment on the Gerrit patch if you care to see what this kind of communication looks like in practice.

All of this is basically just "don't be a snarky arse". It's sad that it has to be mentioned at all, but... here we are. Also, yes, I realise that I'm being snarky, but as someone else mentioned, I'm sure everyone who this is meant for can take it as well as they dish it out.

> 
> 
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 2:32 PM Tor Arne Vestbø <Tor.arne.Vestbo at qt.io
> <mailto:Tor.arne.Vestbo at qt.io> > wrote:
> 
> 
> 	I 100% stand behind Mitch’s summary below. This is a real problem in
> this project that not only makes it a less than great place to work, but is also
> indirectly affecting the quality of the code, for those that care only about that
> part.
> 
> 	Tor Arne
> 
> 	> On 25 Oct 2018, at 13:22, Mitch Curtis <mitch.curtis at qt.io
> <mailto:mitch.curtis at qt.io> > wrote:
> 	>
> 	> It's a bit of a loaded question. First you call asocial behaviour a
> "quirk", as if someone who treats other people like crap is "quirky" - I prefer
> your phrase "rude arse". Should a code of conduct aim to stop "quirky"
> behaviour amongst contributors? No, of course not. That's what makes
> people interesting. A code of conduct should draw the line between quirky
> behaviour and "rude arse" behaviour.
> 	>
> 	> To answer your question: in my experience, nothing happens. They
> continue being a rude arse because:
> 	>
> 	> 1) That is who they are and they aren't interested in changing.
> 	> 2) People have already decided that this person's technical
> contributions are worth enough that they can step on anyone, regardless of
> the fact that it's supposed to be a professional setting.
> 	> 3) They're "actually a nice person in real life"... as if this excuses it.
> So if I write "You're a dumbarse" on a piece of paper and send it through the
> post, but a week later invite you over to my house for a home-cooked meal,
> it's OK? Are we really encouraging keyboard warriors?
> 	>
> 	> Rafael said:
> 	>
> 	> "During all these years contributing to Qt I have encountered many
> times strong criticism in gerrit - some people were very harsh or *seemingly*
> rude - or that was what I thought, until I realized that: 1) it was just their
> modus operandi; 2) at the end of the day, their comments made sense and
> improved my code; 3) they were not butt hurt when roles were reversed."
> 	>
> 	> To me it seems like you guys are saying:
> 	>
> 	> "I don't care if this person treats me like crap because they sure can
> code."
> 	>
> 	> I'm happy for you if you've gotten this far in life and decided that
> you like being insulted in exchange for someone reviewing your code (or
> even just asking a question on IRC), but personally I do not like it. I'm more
> than capable of standing up for myself, but other people who feel the same
> way may not feel comfortable speaking out.
> 	>
> 	> What you're also saying is:
> 	>
> 	> "You (the Qt Project) aren't going to do anything about their
> behaviour because they contribute good code."
> 	>
> 	> Which sadly is true. Really, your question seems almost rhetorical
> given this. It's even explicitly acknowledged on the home page of the thing
> that we're basing our code of conduct on:
> 	>
> 	> "People with “merit” are often excused for their bad behavior in
> public spaces based on the value of their technical contributions."
> 	>
> 	> - https://www.contributor-covenant.org/
> 	>
> 	> Disregarding all of the other factors (racism, sexual identity, age,
> etc.) and just keeping it purely about treating other people with respect: the
> statement above is absolutely true.
> 	>
> 	> Honestly I have my doubts whether this code of conduct will
> actually achieve its most basic goal, given that many people have apparently
> tried to intervene with the people who treat others poorly and nothing has
> come of it (although people will tell you it's gotten better). I hope it does, but
> I've been in the community and around these people long enough to know
> that it probably won't. Reading through these replies, it's also clear that a
> large amount of the people responding are quite happy with the status quo,
> which, although not surprising to me, is always disheartening.
> 	>
> 	> I haven't seen any racism, discrimination, etc., but there are
> definitely people within the community whose behaviour is such that other
> developers will avoid interacting with them, even if it would have likely
> improved the quality of their work or got that work done faster. I doubt you'll
> hear from those people though, because they just want to get their job done
> -- which is perfectly understandable, but does not excuse the behaviour of
> the people they try to avoid.
> 	>
> 	>> On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 1:06 PM Konstantin Tokarev
> <annulen at yandex.ru <mailto:annulen at yandex.ru>
> 	>> <mailto:annulen at yandex.ru <mailto:annulen at yandex.ru> > >
> wrote:
> 	>>
> 	>>
> 	>>
> 	>>
> 	>>      25.10.2018, 13:01, "NIkolai Marchenko"
> <enmarantispam at gmail.com <mailto:enmarantispam at gmail.com>
> 	>> <mailto:enmarantispam at gmail.com
> <mailto:enmarantispam at gmail.com> > >:
> 	>>      >> And btw, we have had a clear majority in favour of adding a
> CoC at
> 	>> the Contributor Summit
> 	>>      >
> 	>>      > It seems very wrong to make such decisions at conventions
> where
> 	>> only a small part of the contributors can participate.
> 	>>      > Especially for something as big and divisive
> 	>>
> 	>>      +1
> 	>>
> 	>>      --
> 	>>      Regards,
> 	>>      Konstantin
> 	>>
> 	>
> 	> _______________________________________________
> 	> Development mailing list
> 	> Development at qt-project.org <mailto:Development at qt-
> project.org>
> 	> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
> 
> 