mem0ai--mem0/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md

Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct

Our Pledge

We as members, contributors, and leaders pledge to make participation in our 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, caste, color, 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 behavior that contributes to a positive environment for our community include:

• 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 behavior include:

• The use of sexualized 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

Contribution Conduct

Mem0 receives more contributions than any maintainer can read line by line. The rules below exist so that the time we do have goes to people who are actually trying to improve the project. They apply to issues, pull requests, discussions, and reviews.

Be honest about how the work was produced. Using an AI tool to find a bug, write a patch, or draft a description is fine and welcome. Not saying so is not. Every issue form and the pull request template ask about AI, and the answer is never held against you. It tells a reviewer where to look. An unanswered review comment on code the author cannot explain is what costs us the afternoon.

Do not submit work you have not verified. A reported bug means you ran it and saw it. A pull request means you ran the tests. Pasting a model's output, a scanner result, or a plausible-looking patch and letting maintainers find out whether it is real moves your work onto someone else's desk. Reports and patches that turn out to be unverified are closed without a detailed response.

Do not fabricate evidence. Invented tracebacks, benchmark numbers you did not measure, reproductions that were never run, tests that assert the implementation back at itself, and descriptions that describe a different change than the diff makes are all treated the same way, regardless of whether a person or a tool produced them.

Match your volume to your engagement. Open changes at the rate you can discuss them. A queue of open pull requests from one author, none of them answered when questioned, is treated as automated submission and handled under enforcement below, whatever the individual diffs look like.

Do not press for merges. Bumping a thread, tagging maintainers repeatedly, asking in Discord or by direct message for a review, and reopening a closed pull request without addressing why it was closed all take attention away from the queue rather than moving your change through it. One polite follow-up after a reasonable wait is fine.

Do not contribute for a badge. Changes made to raise a contribution count, qualify for an event, or pad a profile, whitespace edits, README churn, and mechanical reformatting bundled with nothing else, are closed on sight.

Disagreement is fine, and closing is not a verdict. Our pull request gate closes changes that do not yet link an accepted issue. That is a queue decision, not a judgment of you or your code, and reopening takes about a minute. Argue for your change on its merits; that is a normal and welcome part of contributing.

Enforcement Responsibilities

Community leaders are responsible for clarifying and enforcing our standards of acceptable behavior and will take appropriate and fair corrective action in response to any behavior that they deem inappropriate, threatening, offensive, or harmful.

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

Scope

This Code of Conduct applies within all community spaces, including this repository, our Discord, and our documentation, and also applies when an individual is officially representing the community in public spaces. Examples of representing our community 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 behavior may be reported to the maintainers at support@mem0.ai. All complaints will be reviewed and investigated promptly and fairly.

All community leaders are obligated to respect the privacy and security of the reporter of any incident.

Enforcement Guidelines

Community leaders will follow these Community Impact Guidelines in determining the consequences for any action they deem in violation of this Code of Conduct:

1. Correction

Community Impact: Use of inappropriate language or other behavior deemed unprofessional or unwelcome in the community, or a first contribution that breaches the Contribution Conduct rules above.

Consequence: A private, written warning from community leaders, providing clarity around the nature of the violation and an explanation of why the behavior was inappropriate. A public apology may be requested.

2. Warning

Community Impact: A violation through a single incident or series of actions, including a repeated pattern of unverified or automated submissions after a first warning.

Consequence: A warning with consequences for continued behavior. No interaction with the people involved, including unsolicited interaction with those enforcing the Code of Conduct, for a specified period of time. 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. At this stage the account may be denounced in .github/VOUCHED.td, which means new pull requests are flagged automatically.

3. Temporary Ban

Community Impact: A serious violation of community standards, including sustained inappropriate behavior.

Consequence: A temporary ban from any sort of interaction or public communication with the community for a specified period of time. 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 behavior, 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. The Contribution Conduct section is specific to this repository.

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. Translations are available at https://www.contributor-covenant.org/translations.