Code of Conduct

Our pledge

We as members, contributors and maintainers pledge to make participation in our project and community 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, 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.

Our standards

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 and apologizing to those affected by our mistakes, and learning from the experience.
Focusing on what is best not just for us as individuals, but for the overall community.

Examples of unacceptable behaviour:

The use of 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.

Project-specific notes

A few things worth saying out loud for this particular library:

Technical disagreement is fine, dismissive language is not. “I disagree because X” is constructive. “This is obviously wrong” is not.
Reviews critique code, not people. When reviewing a PR, address the patch — not the author’s experience level, intelligence, or motives.
English is the working language. Many contributors are non-native speakers. Be patient with phrasing; reach for clarity, not for points.
Don’t gatekeep on JDK version. Some users target JDK 8 in production. That’s a real constraint, not a moral failing.
Don’t gatekeep on “real” functional programming. This is a pragmatic Core-Java library, not Haskell. People are here to ship Java, not pass a category-theory exam.

Enforcement responsibilities

The maintainer (Sven Ruppert) is responsible for clarifying and enforcing standards of acceptable behaviour and will take appropriate and fair corrective action in response to any behaviour deemed inappropriate, threatening, offensive or harmful.

The maintainer has the right and responsibility to remove, edit or reject comments, commits, code, wiki edits, issues and other contributions that are not aligned with this Code of Conduct, and will communicate reasons for moderation decisions when appropriate.

Scope

This Code of Conduct applies in all community spaces, and also applies when an individual is officially representing the community in public spaces. Examples include: using an official email address, posting via an official social media account, or acting as an appointed representative at an online or offline event.

Enforcement

Instances of abusive, harassing or otherwise unacceptable behaviour may be reported to the maintainer at contact@sven-ruppert.com.

All complaints will be reviewed and investigated promptly and fairly. The maintainer is obligated to respect the privacy and security of the reporter of any incident.

What to include in a report

What happened — links, screenshots, or quoted text where possible.
When and where it happened.
Whether anyone else witnessed it.
Whether you’ve already attempted to resolve it directly.
What outcome you would like to see.

You do not need to be the target to report — bystander reports are welcome.

Enforcement guidelines

The maintainer will follow these guidelines in determining the consequences for any action deemed in violation of this Code of Conduct.

1. Correction

Community impact: Use of inappropriate language or other behaviour deemed unprofessional or unwelcome in the community.

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

Community 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, including unsolicited interaction with those enforcing the Code of Conduct, for a specified period. This includes avoiding interactions in community spaces as well as external channels like social media. Violating these terms may lead to a temporary or permanent ban.

3. Temporary ban

Community 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. No public or private interaction with the people involved, including unsolicited interaction with those enforcing the Code of Conduct, is allowed during this period. Violating these terms may lead to a permanent ban.

4. Permanent ban

Community impact: Demonstrating a pattern of violation of community standards, including sustained inappropriate behaviour, harassment of an individual, or aggression toward or disparagement of classes of individuals.

Consequence: A permanent ban from any sort of public interaction within the community.

Attribution

This Code of Conduct is adapted from the Contributor Covenant, version 2.1, available at https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/2/1/code_of_conduct.html.

Community Impact Guidelines were inspired by Mozilla’s code of conduct enforcement ladder.

For answers to common questions about this code of conduct, see the FAQ at https://www.contributor-covenant.org/faq.

Be kind, be specific,assume good faith.