I was planning to start it officially on Monday to give people the weekend to comment.
Already started the conversation unofficially the other day. The WG seems amenable with some simple requirements (e.g. specifying who the contact person is and listing that in a CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md file). But the key thing is I had to start the conversation with someone first.
Quick update: it’s looking like the Conduct WG will be up for this idea. We are in the midst of setting up regular meetings and at the first one we are going to discuss this topic. I’ll report back when again when there’s more concrete information.
Thanks @brettcannon. For what it’s worth, I am, like (I think) approximately everyone in this thread, in favor of having the PyPA move to the PSF Code of Conduct, including the PSF CoC handling procedure. And thank you for moving to get this addressed.
If you would like for anyone from the PyPA to guest-star in part of a Conduct WG meeting, just to talk a bit about logistics, please do speak up here and let us know! In a pinch I could be that person.
Best you will probably get is no one has complained. Otherwise more hearts and positive replies than negative. It’s a a drawback from the lack of official project structure compared to e.g. python-dev where the steering council made the CoC decision. But as you said, PEP 609 would help with this.
Would people be willing to shift to the PSF Code of Conduct and mandating all projects adopt it visibly?
What does that mean exactly? That all PYPA projects will inherently adopt the Python CoC? Or that all projects on PYPI will? I don’t want my projects to be (directly or indirectly) associated with any CoC.
I’m asking because pytest doesn’t seem to be part of the PYPA organization on GitHub, so I’m not sure I understand the extension of this decision and what packages are going to be affected.
In the process of doing this, I was hesitant to add the following:
I’m concerned about having to maintain an up-to-date list of the PyPA admin/moderators (and having to expose their personal contact information)
I’m concerned about deviating from the existing PSF CoC process by adding an intermediate step here, especially if we’re just going to be reporting all incidents up to the Conduct-WG anyways.
I think I’d prefer if we just simplify things by following the same incident reporting procedure that the PSF CoC outlines instead, and the Conduct-WG can route any PyPA-related incidents to us as necessary.
I think the suggestion was to not just expose who would be handling CoC reports (which the GitHub user would be fine for) but also a point of contact, which would require email, or some mailing list that has all the committers on it, which is yet another thing to keep up to date.
Also, not all users have a “valid” email associated with their commits. For example, all my commits have From: Dustin Ingram <firstname.lastname@example.org>, which is not an address that receives mail.
It doesn’t have to be unique per-repository. It can be a handful of people that are trusted to make reasonable CoC decisions and are willing to do the work.
Another option is to set up a mailing list at mail.python.org whose archives are private and only those people who are CoC moderators can subscribe to. Then all emails to the list will end up in the moderation queue and you can let them in as appropriate.
Not doing this is the actual deviation, not what the Conduct WG asked the PyPA do (so to be clear, the Conduct WG explicitly asked for that structure, not me personally).
For mailing lists and such, the Conduct WG acts as a central entity to record incidents and to provide guidance. But otherwise they are not expected to be front-line for this sort of thing (otherwise they would potentially get overwhelmed as the WG isn’t that big). So wanting to cut us out and hoist it all to the Conduct WG is not standard and would probably lead the Conduct WG not on-boarding other projects as it just won’t scale for the WG.
I’m not the greatest at staying on top of email anymore, but if we need people I’m happy to try and stay on top of this list as one of the people. But if we get enough other volunteers, I’m happy to also not be one of the people.