I would be happy to adopt the SciPy code of conduct and code of conduct committee both.
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 5:04 PM Marten van Kerkwijk < m.h.vankerkw...@gmail.com> wrote: > My ideal version would be substantially shorter, maybe just quote the > golden rule, but I am happy with the suggestion to just adapt this text. I > particularly appreciate the lack of absolutism in the text, and the > acknowledgement that it is possible to have a bad day even while not > distracting from the overall message. > -- Marten > > On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 6:30 PM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gomm...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 10:02 PM, Stefan van der Walt < >> stef...@berkeley.edu> wrote: >> >>> Hi everyone, >>> >>> A while ago, SciPy (the library) adopted its Code of Conduct: >>> >>> https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/dev/conduct/code_of_conduct.html >>> >>> We worked hard to make that document friendly, while at the same time >>> stating clearly the kinds of behavior that would and would not be >>> tolerated. >>> >>> I propose that we adopt the SciPy code of conduct for NumPy as well. It >>> is a good way to signal to newcomers that this is a community that cares >>> about how people are treated. And I think we should do anything in our >>> power to make NumPy as attractive as possible! >>> >> >> +1 >> >> Maybe a bit of context: the SciPy code of conduct had quite a lot of >> discussion, and importantly in the end everyone involved in the discussion >> was happy with (or at least not displeased by) the final document. Hence I >> see it as a good document to adopt also by other projects. >> >> And here's what I wrote as the intro for that CoC discussion: >> 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. >> >> Note on (4): NumPy is a sponsored project of NumFOCUS, and I've been >> asked several times how it can be that NumPy is sponsored but does not have >> a CoC. >> >> Cheers, >> Ralf >> >> >>> If we adopt this document as policy, we will need to select a Code of >>> Conduct committee, to whom potential transgressions can be reported. >>> The individuals doing this for SciPy may very well be happy to do the >>> same for NumPy, but the community should decide whom will best serve >>> those roles. >>> >>> Let me know your thoughts. >>> >>> Thanks! >>> Stéfan >>> _______________________________________________ >>> NumPy-Discussion mailing list >>> NumPy-Discussion@python.org >>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> NumPy-Discussion mailing list >> NumPy-Discussion@python.org >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion >> >> > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > NumPy-Discussion@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion >
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
