Gary (*) The original announcement discussed behavior. That is basically conduct. And either there is a code for such behaviour (conduct) in which case the behaviour (conduct) can be measured against, or there is no such code, which means it cannot be measured against or used to evaluate the conduct. If there was a conduct violation, I believe that is for the CoCC to work. If there was not a behavioural code in existence, there can be no violation, and then FESCo members themselves might (inadvertently?) be in violation of the Fedora CoCC for arbitrarily imposing conditions not in their remit. Either way, it seems like the CoCC should have been (be) involved in such a process so that the appropriate processes could be performed. Since there is a CoCC member in FESCo, I do wonder if they considered whether the CoCC should have been involved, and/or touched base with members of the CoCC to ask for their opinions as far as whether involvement was warranted. Again, I presume the review by the Council will help answer that question. No one ever wants to be on the CoCC or the ethics committee or the finance committee for a publicly traded organization, but those committees and roles and responsibilities can be critically important in a well run organization. -- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
