"Yes. Clients were encouraging me to have a code of conduct.
(Having a CoC seems to be a trendy thing nowadays.) So I looked around and came up with what you found, submitted the idea to the whole staff, and everybody approved."
Leaving aside the religious aspect of the CoC which are probably going to be controversial the other rules are actually fairly common sense. A few that caught my eye:
> Do not give way to anger.
> Do not nurse a grudge.
> Do not entertain deceit in your heart.
> Do not give a false peace.
> Do not swear, for fear of perjuring yourself.
> Utter only truth from heart and mouth.
> Do not return evil for evil.
> Be not a grumbler.
> Be not a detractor.
> Hate no one.
> Be not jealous, nor harbor envy.
> Do not love quarreling.
> Shun arrogance.
> Respect your seniors.
> Love your juniors.
> Make peace with your adversary before the sun sets.
Best CoC I have ever seen! I do not think that it is joke. From sqlite's source code:
The author disclaims copyright to this source code. In place of
a legal notice, here is a blessing:
May you do good and not evil.
May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others.
May you share freely, never taking more than you give.
I am surprised at how dismissive and intolerant the comments here are of this code of conduct. And I say this as an atheist that still harbors a lot of resentment against my family's religion.
Do you have so little empathy that you can't possibly image someone adopting The Rule of St. Benedict in good faith (no pun intended)?
I don't think that the problem is adopting in bad or good faith; personally I am saddened because the CoCs are meant to be there to protect people that are usually in a weaker position and in our development communities that usually identifies with a few categories: women, LGBT+, disabled people etc.
Now if you look at it from this point of view I think that you can at least see the irony of using a religious text in this context; to be more clear, quoting their webpage:
> This code of conduct has proven its mettle in thousands of diverse communities for over 1,500 years
Those "thousands of diverse communities" include the ones who were using their religion as a pretext to burn heretics/witches, torture homosexuals and in general oppress the weak and the diverse as well as the ones that today are still trying to infuse young people with their toxic shame when they are non-conforming.
This is what really grinds my gears: some people would do anything to NOT take responsibility and hide themselves behind nice words with little to no real content.
Sure, why not? Group codes of conduct are a form of mutually-enforced morality. Why not pick up a template that seems to have worked in the past and reuse parts of it?
It all won't fit, of course, but why re-invent the wheel? I'm really much more interested in the track record of how various of these items worked out (or not) than I am in impeaching the source. Who cares about that stuff?
Yes, it's meant as a joking stab at those who seemingly cannot live without having a CoC everywhere. Especially in projects they do not actually participate in. Now watch as this gets blown out of proportion, because this will make some people really, really angry.
Id be very surprised if this stays up actually.
Given that the lead of the SQLite project's personal website has references to an organisation that translates religious Scripture, I'm not sure it really is a "joking stab".
> this will make some people really, really angry
Suggesting that a text written by Christians is a good basis for an OSS project's CoC, when Christianity has a pretty fucking horrific track record when it comes to most of the people who, without Codes of Conduct are pushed out of or never welcome in OSS projects, and you're surprised that people might be angry?
"However, those who wish to participate in the SQLite community, either by commenting on the public mailing lists or by contributing patches or suggestions or in any other way, are expected to conduct themselves in a manner that honors the overarching spirit of the rule, even if they disagree with specific details. Polite and professional discussion is always welcomed, from anyone."
If the religious details won't be enforced, there's no reason for them to be in the CoC. This CoC exists in its current form solely because Richard Hipp is very religious.
People seem to be upset about the religious parts of the code of conduct, just read the overview, it's in no way intended to force religion onto people.
If the religious bits was to be deleted, it would be hard for anyone to disagree.
I see it as no less good or bad than any other code of conduct I've seen. Most of them could be used to throw anyone out of any project, if you chose to do so. The code of conducts for a lot of projects are so selectively enforced that is ridiculous.
Leaving aside everything else, using the rule of St. Benedict and pointing out its influence on medieval thought seems like poor choice. Benedictine monasteries were often notoriously corrupt. There were frequent attempts at Benedictine reform, but it was almost always that case that in a few decades, the reformers would become more corrupt than those they were initially criticizing.
And, of course, is medieval government actually something to aspire to? Medieval European governments were extremely unstable, collapsed frequently (often due to assassination), rarely went a decade without civil war/armed rebellion, their legal systems were patchy and inconsistent, and almost all of them had laws which separated punishments for commoners and noble-born. The fact that medieval law was influenced by the Benedictine rule seems like a reason to reject it.
I do get a little joy on my monday morning that there are still people out there doing good work who can just tell people in a pig's eye when they are pressured to do stupid things.
An interesting mirroring of the popular CoCs these days. While they enshrine what one could call "San Francisco Democrat" values, this CoC enshrines christian conservative values.
If you think value-based CoCs are fine, you shouldn't have a problem with this.
Of course value-based CoCs are fine. The problem with this isn't the content, it's the fact that they're using the content because they fundamentally disagree with codes of conduct.
By "San Francisco Democrat" do you mean "gay people exist and are fine"? Or "women are an equal part of society"? I'm having trouble unraveling your dogwhistle here.
I don't understand the purpose of this. I hope it's an elaborate joke, but it is surprisingly unprofessional.
A few years ago I spent some time in their dev mailing list and proposed a patch. I doubt I'd still do this in this context. This code of conduct that requires members to honor th Christ, even as a joke, would make me reluctant to interact with SQLite.
Having a code of conduct isn't about creating rules, it's about making a public commitment to enforce them.
Now that they've shown us that they clearly don't care about a code of conduct, I wouldn't trust them to ever handle any actual conduct issues in a reasonable way. Maybe they'd just send me a joke instead.
Are there any studies proving the effectiveness of CoCs ? Like, more active contributors, or a bigger market share, on projects after they adopted their CoC?
Why? Seems to me more likely a sincere attempt to communicate the author's own code of conduct, and the spirit in which he has offered sqlite to his neighbors.
[+] [-] chippy|7 years ago|reply
http://sqlite.1065341.n5.nabble.com/Regarding-CoC-td104277.h...
From Richard:
"Yes. Clients were encouraging me to have a code of conduct. (Having a CoC seems to be a trendy thing nowadays.) So I looked around and came up with what you found, submitted the idea to the whole staff, and everybody approved."
[+] [-] simias|7 years ago|reply
> Do not give way to anger.
> Do not nurse a grudge.
> Do not entertain deceit in your heart.
> Do not give a false peace.
> Do not swear, for fear of perjuring yourself.
> Utter only truth from heart and mouth.
> Do not return evil for evil.
> Be not a grumbler.
> Be not a detractor.
> Hate no one.
> Be not jealous, nor harbor envy.
> Do not love quarreling.
> Shun arrogance.
> Respect your seniors.
> Love your juniors.
> Make peace with your adversary before the sun sets.
Good rules to live by IMO.
[+] [-] tchalla|7 years ago|reply
http://sqlite.1065341.n5.nabble.com/Regarding-CoC-td104277.h...
> Yeah, that's gonna magically appear on Hacker News within the month. For those curious ...
[+] [-] swebs|7 years ago|reply
https://github.com/domgetter/NCoC
[+] [-] SonOfThePlower|7 years ago|reply
The author disclaims copyright to this source code. In place of a legal notice, here is a blessing: May you do good and not evil. May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others. May you share freely, never taking more than you give.
[+] [-] qbaqbaqba|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] finnthehuman|7 years ago|reply
Do you have so little empathy that you can't possibly image someone adopting The Rule of St. Benedict in good faith (no pun intended)?
[+] [-] Sprign|7 years ago|reply
Now if you look at it from this point of view I think that you can at least see the irony of using a religious text in this context; to be more clear, quoting their webpage:
> This code of conduct has proven its mettle in thousands of diverse communities for over 1,500 years
Those "thousands of diverse communities" include the ones who were using their religion as a pretext to burn heretics/witches, torture homosexuals and in general oppress the weak and the diverse as well as the ones that today are still trying to infuse young people with their toxic shame when they are non-conforming.
This is what really grinds my gears: some people would do anything to NOT take responsibility and hide themselves behind nice words with little to no real content.
[+] [-] stephenr|7 years ago|reply
I think it's more that the wording suggests the author pushing his own faith onto others.
[+] [-] DanielBMarkham|7 years ago|reply
Sure, why not? Group codes of conduct are a form of mutually-enforced morality. Why not pick up a template that seems to have worked in the past and reuse parts of it?
It all won't fit, of course, but why re-invent the wheel? I'm really much more interested in the track record of how various of these items worked out (or not) than I am in impeaching the source. Who cares about that stuff?
[+] [-] mikeash|7 years ago|reply
I can imagine someone adopting in good faith a code of conduct that says “no colored people.” That doesn’t mean I’ll be happy about it.
[+] [-] stupidbird|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] O2F2|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] caiocaiocaio|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] joshberkus|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] drb91|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mikeash|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] stephenr|7 years ago|reply
> this will make some people really, really angry
Suggesting that a text written by Christians is a good basis for an OSS project's CoC, when Christianity has a pretty fucking horrific track record when it comes to most of the people who, without Codes of Conduct are pushed out of or never welcome in OSS projects, and you're surprised that people might be angry?
[+] [-] unknown|7 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] runjake|7 years ago|reply
"However, those who wish to participate in the SQLite community, either by commenting on the public mailing lists or by contributing patches or suggestions or in any other way, are expected to conduct themselves in a manner that honors the overarching spirit of the rule, even if they disagree with specific details. Polite and professional discussion is always welcomed, from anyone."
Edit: I am not religious at all.
[+] [-] vor_|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mrweasel|7 years ago|reply
If the religious bits was to be deleted, it would be hard for anyone to disagree.
I see it as no less good or bad than any other code of conduct I've seen. Most of them could be used to throw anyone out of any project, if you chose to do so. The code of conducts for a lot of projects are so selectively enforced that is ridiculous.
[+] [-] caiocaiocaio|7 years ago|reply
And, of course, is medieval government actually something to aspire to? Medieval European governments were extremely unstable, collapsed frequently (often due to assassination), rarely went a decade without civil war/armed rebellion, their legal systems were patchy and inconsistent, and almost all of them had laws which separated punishments for commoners and noble-born. The fact that medieval law was influenced by the Benedictine rule seems like a reason to reject it.
[+] [-] thrower123|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mikl|7 years ago|reply
If you think value-based CoCs are fine, you shouldn't have a problem with this.
[+] [-] joshberkus|7 years ago|reply
* Relieve the poor. * Clothe the naked. * Visit the sick.
... those seem like "liberal values" to me, at least on the American spectrum.
[+] [-] archagon|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] drngdds|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] woolvalley|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] stupidbird|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] drb91|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] roguecoder|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] idoubtit|7 years ago|reply
A few years ago I spent some time in their dev mailing list and proposed a patch. I doubt I'd still do this in this context. This code of conduct that requires members to honor th Christ, even as a joke, would make me reluctant to interact with SQLite.
[+] [-] chippy|7 years ago|reply
Does it? It says that it requires developers to conduct themselves in a manner that honors the overarching spirit of the rule.
[+] [-] lsd5you|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Cthulhu_|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] HarryHirsch|7 years ago|reply
The text does not permit this interpretation.
[+] [-] on_and_off|7 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] stupidbird|7 years ago|reply
Now that they've shown us that they clearly don't care about a code of conduct, I wouldn't trust them to ever handle any actual conduct issues in a reasonable way. Maybe they'd just send me a joke instead.
[+] [-] apexalpha|7 years ago|reply
Aww here goes my entire social coping strategy.
That being said: this is a stab at Linux CoC? I can see the humour in it but... Seems unprofessonal for a project as SQLite?
[+] [-] yakshaving_jgt|7 years ago|reply
Oh dear. That's basically all of us.
[+] [-] kingofhdds|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gonvaled|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] LawnDart1|7 years ago|reply
Second 69. Love your juniors. Really? Won't HR get involved?
[+] [-] AndriyKunitsyn|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sacado2|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bluetomcat|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rbanffy|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] catawbasam|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] manicdee|7 years ago|reply