Project:Pywikibot/Code of conduct RFC

In order to have a safe and productive space for contributors of Pywikibot. I hereby suggest we adapt and follow a code of conduct.

Option 1 - Open code of conduct
Open code of conduct is adapted by github and several major open source projects. One of pros is that it honors diversity much more than other code of conducts, in other hand it doesn't have precise statement for code maintainers, actions when a maintainer is misbehaving, and precise statement on where and when this code of conduct should apply (compare it to Contributor Covenant). Ladsgroup (talk) 13:51, 27 July 2015 (UTC)


 * John Vandenberg (talk) 19:42, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Option 2 - Contributor Covenant
Contributor Covenant is focused on open source and rather small projects but it seems good enough for Pywikibot. It is short, diversity statement is not good but it's well adapted for projects as big as Pywikibot. Ladsgroup (talk) 13:51, 27 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Per above Ladsgroup (talk) 13:51, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
 * John Vandenberg (talk) 19:42, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Stresses project maintainers' responsibility. -- Ricordi  samoa  06:48, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Option 3 - Code of conduct for WMF staff
Code of conduct policy is more Wiki-related than the other two. Ladsgroup (talk) 13:51, 27 July 2015 (UTC)


 * It is irrelevant wrt Pywikibot, as far as I can see. John Vandenberg (talk) 19:42, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Option 4
"Use common sense" — the shortest, simplest, and more flexible option. -- Ricordi  samoa  14:11, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
 * -- Ricordi  samoa  14:11, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
 * as global "common sense" does not exist on a big diverse planet with billions of people. --Malyacko (talk) 15:42, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
 * . John Vandenberg (talk) 19:42, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Option 5
Wait until Code of conduct for technical spaces/Draft has been finalised. John Vandenberg (talk) 19:42, 27 July 2015 (UTC)


 * strongly waiting unless T90908 goes into 'Stalled' status for more than a month, as it will apply to Pywikibot by default if enacted, making the decision of RFC superfluous. John Vandenberg (talk) 19:42, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
 * This draft in current status is inadequate. It doesn't have any explicit statement banning personal attacks based on characteristics of people (like race, etc.) IMO we can adapt another CoC and this one together if this draft stays at this shape. Ladsgroup (talk) 09:10, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
 * It seems to have been added. I think we should help form the MW CoC to work for us as well, because a common CoC is practical. Valhallasw (talk) 15:05, 7 August 2015 (UTC)