[SciPy-Dev] establishing a Code of Conduct for SciPy

[Nathaniel Smith]

On Sat, Aug 26, 2017 at 6:14 PM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gommers at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 12:13 PM, Charles R Harris
> <charlesr.harris at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 4:11 AM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gommers at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 12:53 PM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gommers at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I propose that we as SciPy developers and community adopt a Code of
>>>> Conduct.
>>>>
>>>> As you probably know, Code of Conduct (CoC) documents are becoming more
>>>> common every year for open source projects, and there are a number of good
>>>> reasons to adopt a CoC:
>>>> 1. It gives us the opportunity to explicitly express the values and
>>>> behaviors we'd like to see in our community.
>>>> 2. It is designed to make everyone feel welcome (and while I think we're
>>>> a welcoming community anyway, not having a CoC may look explicitly
>>>> unwelcoming to some potential contributors nowadays).
>>>> 3. It gives us a tool to address a set of problems if and when they
>>>> occur, as well as a way for anyone to report issues or behavior that is
>>>> unacceptable to them (much better than having those people potentially leave
>>>> the community).
>>>> 4. SciPy is not yet a fiscally sponsored project of NumFOCUS, however I
>>>> think we'd like to be in the near future.  NumFOCUS has started to require
>>>> having a CoC as a prerequisite for new projects joining it.  The PSF has the
>>>> same requirement for any sponsorship for events/projects that it gives.
>>>>
>>>> Also note that GitHub has starting checking the presence of a CoC fairly
>>>> prominently (https://github.com/scipy/scipy/community), and has also
>>>> produced a guide with things to think about when formulating a CoC:
>>>> https://opensource.guide/code-of-conduct/. I recommend reading that guide
>>>> (as well as others guides on that site), it's really good.
>>>>
>>>> To get to a CoC document, a good approach is to borrow text from a CoC
>>>> that has been in use for a while and has proven to be valuable, and then
>>>> modify where needed (similar to a software license - don't invent your own).
>>>> I considered three existing CoC's:
>>>> - The Contributor Covenant
>>>> (http://contributor-covenant.org/version/1/2/0/): simple, concise, the most
>>>> widely used one. The NumFOCUS recommended one is based on it as well
>>>> (https://www.numfocus.org/about/code-of-conduct/).
>>>> - The Python Community Code of Conduct
>>>> (https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/): also simple, addresses mostly
>>>> the spirit in which the Python community is operating / should operate.
>>>> - The Jupyter Code of Conduct
>>>> (https://github.com/jupyter/governance/tree/master/conduct): much more
>>>> detailed, in part derived from the Speak up! and Django ones, more
>>>> appropriate for large communities.
>>>>
>>
>> The contributor covenant looks excellent, short, well structured, and easy
>> to understand. I'd suggest adding just a bit for clarification, for
>> instance, what venues (mailing lists, github) are considered in the SciPy
>> domain, and a bit on whom to contact in case of problems.
>
>
> Thanks for the feedback Chuck. Pauli said on GitHub he preferred something
> shorter and less flowery as well, so that's two votes for the contributor
> covenant or something more in that direction.

It looks like the link above goes to the 1.2 version of the
Contributor Covenant, while the latest version is 1.4:

    https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/

The 1.4 version has a little more detail on venues and a slot to put
in a contact address.

I do think there needs to be at least somewhat more detail on how
reports will be handled -- the last thing you need while trying to
handle a painful and delicate issue is to also be trying to figure
out, like, which mailing list you can use to talk about it or whether
you need to be setting up a new one. At least something like "we'll
have a small committee, they'll have a private mailing list, archives
will be available to the committee members but otherwise confidential,
reports will be acknowledged quickly, if a complaint is about someone
on the committee then they'll recuse themselves", that kind of stuff.

-n

-- 
Nathaniel J. Smith -- https://vorpus.org