Skip to content

Do not imply that pyOpenSci code of conduct is is infectious #252

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jul 28, 2025

Conversation

hamogu
Copy link
Contributor

@hamogu hamogu commented Jul 17, 2025

When opening a PR to review a package, we ask authors to agree to this statement I agree to abide by pyOpenSci's Code of Conduct during the review process and in maintaining my package after should it be accepted.

This seems to intend that every package ever accepted by PyOpenSci has to adopt the PyOpenSci Code of Conduct for the indefinite future for all internal activities (because every activity is related to “maintaining my package” in some way)?
As written, that would apply even if the PyOpenSci’s Code on Conduct changes in the future, i.e. with their submission, projects commit to following rules in decades to come that they don’t even know about yet. That’s a big ask.

I believe that’s not the intent, as in other locations on the website we say All individuals participating in any pyOpenSci program such as our peer review process, need to abide by our code of conduct. and Our code of conduct is mandatory for everyone involved in our review process.

In this PR, I adjust our PR template to make clear that the CoC is not infectious in the sense that it applies to interactions with PyOpenSci, but we don't require all projects to adopt the pyOpenSci code of Conduct for everything forever.

When opening a PR to review a package, we ask authors to agree to this statement `I agree to abide by pyOpenSci's Code of Conduct during the review process and in maintaining my package after should it be accepted.`

This seems to intend that every package ever accepted by PyOpenSci has to adopt the PyOpenSci Code of Conduct for the indefinite future for all internal activities (because every activity is related to “maintaining my package” in some way)?
As written, that would apply even if the PyOpenSci’s Code on Conduct changes in the future, i.e. with their submission, projects commit to following rules in decades to come that they don’t even know about yet. That’s a big ask.

I believe that’s not the intent, as in other locations on the website we say `All individuals participating in any pyOpenSci program such as our peer review process, need to abide by our code of conduct.` and  `Our code of conduct is mandatory for everyone involved in our review process.`

In this PR, I adjust our PR template to make clear that the CoC is not infectious in the sense that it applies to interactions with PyOpenSci, but we don't require all projects to adopt the pyOpenSci code of Conduct for everything forever.
Copy link
Contributor Author

@hamogu hamogu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I started the discussion on slack where the suggestion got a few thumbs up.

Copy link
Member

@lwasser lwasser left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This looks great. The language is as we intend it to be - we do not impose our CoC on projects in our ecosystem but we do enforce it as those projects engage directly with us (in a pyOS space!). That's perfect language.

@lwasser
Copy link
Member

lwasser commented Jul 28, 2025

The points of failure in CI are not related to this PR. The all contributors.org website seems to be down and the link errors are that it doesn't like click "here". it wants a more descriptive link. I think we can safely merge this and revisit the CI issues later as some will resolve if they fix the website!

@lwasser lwasser merged commit d2cf5a5 into pyOpenSci:main Jul 28, 2025
0 of 2 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants