proposed change to Code of Conduct #11
Conversation
as proposed by @sparrell
|
My only thought is that perhaps we should add some clarity on our, "OCA" intent. Our groups, forums, repositories etc are expressly for the intent of moving towards our goals of open interoperability between security solutions. Individual members and contributors are free to engage with eachother outside of the OCA in order to have commercial discussions, recruiting etc but those things should not happen within our groups, on slack etc. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I like it as is, but I'm not against the concept that Mark suggested - but someone needs to come up with words to that effect. Since those words could provoke discussion, my preference would be to adopt the CoC as is for now - so that we have one - and then make Mark's changes as a subsequent PR.
|
The CoC was reviewed at the Feb PGB meeting. It was not clear to me if it was approved. If it was, great. If it wasn't approved, then what is the process for it to get approved (or rejected)? |
as proposed by @sparrell. Proposal is this Pull Request be reviewed by PGB and approved.