Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-community-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-community-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id F2FC5175BC for ; Sat, 18 Apr 2015 17:31:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 91008 invoked by uid 500); 18 Apr 2015 17:31:43 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-community-dev-archive@community.apache.org Received: (qmail 90713 invoked by uid 500); 18 Apr 2015 17:31:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@community.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@community.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@community.apache.org Received: (qmail 90702 invoked by uid 99); 18 Apr 2015 17:31:43 -0000 Received: from mail-relay.apache.org (HELO mail-relay.apache.org) (140.211.11.15) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 18 Apr 2015 17:31:43 +0000 Received: from mail-oi0-f41.google.com (mail-oi0-f41.google.com [209.85.218.41]) by mail-relay.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mail-relay.apache.org) with ESMTPSA id 4D34F1A0163 for ; Sat, 18 Apr 2015 17:31:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: by oiko83 with SMTP id o83so96955966oik.1 for ; Sat, 18 Apr 2015 10:31:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmMjKs6JHUFmV12sLCpUTTSBrK4pwgdgSHsAB6Fe8uB4vFkR0myqyvRgO9nQ86pK8HH4wpu MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.182.106.197 with SMTP id gw5mr7765280obb.30.1429378302321; Sat, 18 Apr 2015 10:31:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.202.193.85 with HTTP; Sat, 18 Apr 2015 10:31:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [85.12.8.106] In-Reply-To: References: <55301E65.5010907@shanecurcuru.org> Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2015 19:31:42 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: BarCampApache offshoot: codes of conduct From: Noah Slater To: Apache ComDev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 For ASF events, I believe we use this: https://www.apache.org/foundation/policies/anti-harassment.html My understanding was that our CoC and our anti-harassment policies compliment each other. But perhaps we want to roll one into the other? On 18 April 2015 at 18:19, jan i wrote: > On 16 April 2015 at 22:41, Shane Curcuru wrote: > >> Hey, after an awesome week at ApacheCon, I noticed that we have a >> different published code of conduct for the conference - as the official >> LF site has - than the one we publish for the ASF overall: >> >> >> >> https://www.apache.org/foundation/policies/conduct.html >> >> Is this something we're interested in changing, i.e. to expand or >> replace the conference one (for future ApacheCon branded events) with >> the overall ASF one? >> > > Formally apacheCON is not our event, we licensed it to Linux Foundation, as > a consequence they define > the CoC (even though I am sure they listen if we have suggestions). > > I will, with my ACEU hat on, talk with LF about how we can enforce, without > being speech police, the CoC. > > Personally I find the LF vesion quite ok, please remember this is not a > matter of wording, but about people > taking action when it happens. > > I think this thread and others have made us all aware of the common > responsibility we share, and awareness > is to me the most important part. > > rgds > jan i. > > >> - Shane >> -- Noah Slater https://twitter.com/nslater