---
# System prepended metadata

title: 'Solid Project: Solid Team'

---

# Solid Project: Solid Team

* Date: 2023-06-14T15:00:00Z
* Call: https://meet.jit.si/solid-team
* Chat: https://gitter.com/solid/team
* Repository: https://github.com/solid/team


## Present
* Jackson Morgan
* [Sarven Capadisli](https://csarven.ca/#i)
* Jeff Zucker
* [Virginia Balseiro](https://virginiabalseiro.com/#me)

---

## Announcements

### Meeting Recordings and Transcripts
* No audio or video recording, or automated transcripts without consent. Meetings are transcribed and made public. If consent is withheld by anyone, recording/retention must not occur.
* Join queue to talk.


### Participation and Code of Conduct
* [Solid Code of Conduct](https://github.com/solid/process/blob/main/code-of-conduct.md), [Positive Work Environment at W3C: Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct](https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/)
* Operating principle for effective participation is to allow access across disabilities, across country borders, and across time. Feedback on tooling and meeting timing is welcome.
* If this is your first time, welcome! please introduce yourself.

### Scribes

* SC

### Introductions
* name: text

---

## Topics

### Clarify the use of Solid Code of Conduct for all repositories under the GitHub solid organisation
URL: https://github.com/solid/team/issues/36

* SC: A better topic may be clarifying whether solid-contrib is under the purview ofthe Solid Team. It's broader than whether the Solid team deems if the Solid-contrib repository should use the Solid code of conduct. The reason the issue came up was because the solid-contrib repo wasn't clear what code of conduct it was using. Is the whole organization solid-contrib under the purview of the solid team?
* VB: Have some vague memory of about solid-contrib's approval.
* JZ: My memory is RV's view on not endorsing anything under solid-contrib, but then a lot of things under solid org moved to there. I think part of htat was that not have apps under solid org. So if we do that then solid-contrib would be it. Whether that constitutes endorsement, I don' tknow. W ehsould figure out where solid fits wrt apps. I've be in favour where there is some place where people's stuff is visible.
* VB: From the CoC perspective, agree wiht SC to clarify. It means that if any issue, e.g., CoC violation, then those reports would come to us/CoCC. If we want to say this is part of Solid org, then yes, it'd be under our CoC. We need to clarify the role of solid-contrib.
* SC: I know there's multiple threads. But, we can pick one topic at a time:
* JZ: I think we should think about levels of endorsement. Anything on the Solid github goes under the CoC. I think we need to define that relationship. The second question is has anyone been following Michiel's arguments about the different branches of CSS and the fact that the code of conduct means they can ignore anyone's opinion.
* VB: CSS is separate. They have their own code of conduct, but it points to our code of conduct, but we have no jurisdiction over them, so it's a bad code of conduct.
* JZ: We need to think about what sort of Code of Conduct violations are occurring and why we need to get involved. What should our roles be?
* SC: Maybe we could follow up to inform the community server org. Original issue was here: https://github.com/CommunitySolidServer/CommunitySolidServer/issues/1343 to create a CoC but they decided to use the SOlid Code of Conduct. That needs to be reviewed by CSS.

ACTION: The code of conduct committee will evaluate whether CSS should decouple their COC from our code of conduct and nudge the CSS team accordingly.


#### Update the Solid org to say that everything under Solid org is covered by Solid CoC

* SC: https://github.com/solid/team/issues/36#issue-1731963791 was to update solid org description somewhere.
* No objections.

ACTION: Jackson will clarify the description of the GH org to say that every repo in the Solid org is under the COC.


#### Role of solid-contrib
* SC: It seems like the admins/team that's there right now is similar to the team in the Solid Org. So to make that transition with the repos is not a big deal.
* VC: I'm inclined to say that it's a completely separate thing despite the fact that we have members in common. It feels like it can be it's own separate thing.
* JZ: I think that anything under Solid is under the Solid org, moderated by this team, and covered by the code of conduct. But, Solid-contrib should be not moderated by this team, but covered by the code of conduct. We don't have the capacity to moderate apps, but because this is part of the community it is under our rules.
* JC: +1
* SC: +1
* SC: We need to inform the "getting started" repo that it will be under the Solid Team code of conduct because they already have their own code of conduct.

ACTION: Virginia go through each repo in Solid Conrtib and see if they have a code of conduct. If they do, open an issue informing them that we are swapping to the centralized code of conduct.

### Solid World transparency

ACTION: Jackson to let Hadrian know that going forward SW is under ST's purview and that it should be organized by ST, otherwise PRs to newsletter/events page/etc including the claim that it was organized by ST will be rejected.

### Email accounts

* SC: who has access to info@ ?
* VB: should all of us have access?
* JM: Yes. 

ACTION: Jackson to review access to email accounts as part of accounts review.

ACTION: Note that responses to inqueries should be directed to neutral/open/transparent pages.