This project adapts the Contributor Covenant, version 2.1, published at version 2.1 of the code of conduct. The canonical text is the source of the intent. This version adapts it for a single-maintainer project that does open specification work, and the differences are called out at the end.
We as members, contributors and leaders pledge to make participation in this project a harassment-free experience for everyone, regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, level of experience, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, colour, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
We pledge to act and interact in ways that contribute to an open, welcoming, diverse, inclusive and healthy community.
Examples of behaviour that contributes to a positive environment:
- Demonstrating empathy and kindness toward other people
- Being respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints and experiences
- Giving and gracefully accepting constructive feedback
- Accepting responsibility, apologising to those affected by our mistakes, and learning from the experience
- Focusing on what is best for the community rather than for ourselves
Examples of unacceptable behaviour:
- Sexualised language or imagery, and sexual attention or advances of any kind
- Trolling, insulting or derogatory comments, and personal or political attacks
- Public or private harassment
- Publishing others' private information, such as a physical or email address, without their explicit permission
- Other conduct which could reasonably be considered inappropriate in a professional setting
This project exists to argue about a specification. Arguing about a specification is exactly the kind of work where conduct rules do the most work, because the disagreement is legitimate and the manner of it is still a choice.
The following are unacceptable here:
- Arguing a position you do not hold in order to win a thread
- Refusing to answer a direct technical question while continuing to press your point
- Repeatedly reopening a closed question to relitigate it
- Personalising a disagreement about a design into a judgement about a person
- Presenting a citation you have not read, or attributing a position to someone who did not state it
Disagreeing with the specification, with the maintainer, or with each other is welcome and expected. Being unwilling to do it well is not.
Community leaders are responsible for clarifying and enforcing these standards and will take appropriate and fair corrective action in response to any behaviour they deem inappropriate, threatening, offensive or harmful.
Community leaders have the right and responsibility to remove, edit or reject comments, commits, code, issues and other contributions that are not aligned with this code of conduct, and will communicate the reasons for moderation decisions when appropriate.
This code of conduct applies within all community spaces, and also applies when an individual is officially representing the project in public spaces.
Instances of abusive, harassing or otherwise unacceptable behaviour may be reported to the community leaders responsible for enforcement at contactopenax@gmail.com. All complaints will be reviewed and investigated promptly and fairly.
All community leaders are obligated to respect the privacy and security of the reporter of any incident.
Community leaders will follow these guidelines in determining the consequences for any action they deem in violation of this code of conduct:
1. Correction. Impact: use of inappropriate language or other behaviour deemed unprofessional or unwelcome. Consequence: a private, written warning, providing clarity around the nature of the violation and an explanation of why the behaviour was inappropriate. A public apology may be requested.
2. Warning. Impact: a violation through a single incident or series of actions. Consequence: a warning with consequences for continued behaviour. No interaction with the people involved for a specified period of time. Violating these terms may lead to a temporary or permanent ban.
3. Temporary ban. Impact: a serious violation of community standards, including sustained inappropriate behaviour. Consequence: a temporary ban from any sort of interaction or public communication with the community for a specified period of time. Violating these terms may lead to a permanent ban.
4. Permanent ban. Impact: a pattern of violation of community standards, including sustained inappropriate behaviour, aggression toward or disparagement of classes of participants. Consequence: a permanent ban from any sort of public interaction within the community.
There is one maintainer. That is a real limitation of this document and it is worth stating plainly rather than hiding behind a process diagram that implies otherwise.
The maintainer enforces this code, which means the person accused is also the person judging. If a report concerns the maintainer, or if a reporter does not want the maintainer to see it first, GitHub's own conduct reporting is the path that the maintainer cannot intercept. Use GitHub's abuse reporting in that case, or open a public issue describing the conduct without identifying yourself as the reporter. Either route reaches someone outside this project.
Until there is a second maintainer, this is the honest state of it. A governance document written by one person would imply a review structure that does not exist, so there is not one.
This code of conduct is adapted from the Contributor Covenant, version 2.1, available at https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/2/1/code_ofconduct.html.
Community health files for this organisation, including this one, are contributed to every repository in the open-ax organisation that does not carry its own copy.