Should we adopt a code of conduct like Contributor Covenant for our project?

[StevenM]

I’m trying to decide if our small project should adopt a Contributor Covenant for our code of conduct. We’ve had a few recent pull requests where the discussions got pretty heated, and I’m worried it’s pushing away new contributors. I’m just not sure if formalizing it feels too corporate for what’s been a pretty informal group so far.

[Ronald61]

We did try the Contributor Covenant last year. It did cut down on personal attacks in PR threads, but it felt a little corporate for our small, casual group. People talked about it more as a rulebook than a lived culture.

[Isabella.G]

I’m leaning to not overreacting; the core problem might be unclear goals or inconsistent review standards more than the policy itself.

[James92]

We experimented with a light approach: a short code-of-conduct page, a couple of ground rules in the README, and a 24 hour turn around for signoffs. The goal was to keep things moving; PRs started flowing again, but not perfectly.

[Scott4]

Sometimes I wonder if the real issue is onboarding and explainers for first-timers. The policy feels separate from that work; maybe we should focus on mentoring and clearer contribution guides before bringing in formal rules.