These projects are maintained by a small team in its spare time. We work with people who are here to build good software, and we keep this document short so that it can actually be applied.
In every project space (issues, pull requests, discussions, reviews, commit comments and any chat linked from a repository):
- Be tolerant of opposing views. Technical disagreement is normal: argue the point, not the person.
- Keep your language and actions free of personal attacks and disparaging personal remarks.
- Assume good intentions when interpreting what other people write and do.
- Behavior that can reasonably be considered harassment is not tolerated, and neither is publishing someone's private information without their permission.
These expectations follow the four principles of the Ruby Community Conduct Guideline, which Rails also uses.
This document covers the project spaces listed above. It does not govern what people say or do elsewhere.
The maintainers decide, case by case. There is no committee and there are no formal investigations.
- Off-topic, hostile or repetitive comments may be edited, hidden or deleted, and conversations may be locked.
- Anyone who keeps disrupting a project space may be blocked from it, temporarily or permanently, with GitHub's moderation tools. Abuse of GitHub itself is reported to GitHub.
- Maintainers explain a moderation decision when that helps, and correct it when they got it wrong.
Declining a contribution, closing an issue or disagreeing with a technical decision is not a conduct matter.
GitHub is the only channel these projects have. There is no mailbox and no committee behind this document.
- If GitHub shows a Report content option on a comment, issue or pull request, use it: the report goes to the repository administrators, not to the person reported.
- Conduct that breaks GitHub's own rules (harassment, threats, publishing private information, spam) can be reported to GitHub directly.
Reports about a maintainer go through the same routes. These projects have a single maintainer, so there is no independent reviewer; we say so rather than pretend otherwise.