Wulf C. Krueger wrote:
> On Tuesday, 08. January 2008 22:44:17 Chrissy Fullam wrote:
>> 'bodies' would be needed to enforce CoC on #gentoo-dev
>
> I don't really see any need for moderation on #gentoo-dev. We've managed
> quite nicely without big brothers watching us so far and I think we
> sho
On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 19:59 +, Ferris McCormick wrote:
> 3) Most devrel requests seem really to relate to CoC violations. Would
> you like us to bounce those to the CoC people, process them using CoC
> rules, or keep doing what we are doing now (generally, close them with a
> note explaining
On Tuesday, 08. January 2008 22:44:17 Chrissy Fullam wrote:
> 'bodies' would be needed to enforce CoC on #gentoo-dev
I don't really see any need for moderation on #gentoo-dev. We've managed
quite nicely without big brothers watching us so far and I think we
should simply keep doing that.
Yes,
> Ferris McCormick wrote:
> As always, I'd like a status report on Code of Conduct, with
> three questions in mind:
>
> 1) Do we have an implementation schedule?
It is already being enforced by a variety of teams as they find it
applicable.
> 2) Have we identified some warm bodies for it?
Go
As always, I'd like a status report on Code of Conduct, with three
questions in mind:
1) Do we have an implementation schedule? ;
2) Have we identified some warm bodies for it?;
3) Most devrel requests seem really to relate to CoC violations. Would
you like us to bounce those to the CoC peopl
