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 edit

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)Reply[reply]

  •   Support John Vandenberg (talk) 19:42, 27 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Option 2 - Contributor Covenant edit

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)Reply[reply]

Option 3 - Code of conduct for WMF staff edit

Code of conduct policy is more Wiki-related than the other two. Ladsgroup (talk) 13:51, 27 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Option 4 edit

"Use common sense" — the shortest, simplest, and more flexible option. --Ricordisamoa 14:11, 27 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Option 5 edit

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

I wanted to briefly note part of this is now up for a consensus discussion. Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 21:30, 11 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • strongly   Support waiting unless phab: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)Reply[reply]
  • 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)Reply[reply]
  •   Support 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)Reply[reply]