On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 10:08 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> So publishing a formal CoC at all is mainly meant to deal with weak
> points 1 and 2, and then the details of the process are there to try
> to fix point 3.
>
> Yeah, managing the committee is a lot of overhead that in an ideal
> world we wouldn't need, but I think we have to accept it to have a
> process people will have confidence in.
It's worth pointing out that the community has grown considerably in
the last ten years. I assume that adding a bit of process to deal with
these kinds of disputes is related to that.
We have a pretty good track record through totally informal standards
for behavior. Setting a good example is absolutely essential. While
that's still the most important thing, it doesn't seem particularly
scalable on its own.
--
Peter Geoghegan
