From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A3627CCA for ; Tue, 9 Oct 2018 19:39:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from perceval.ideasonboard.com (perceval.ideasonboard.com [213.167.242.64]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 918DC4DA for ; Tue, 9 Oct 2018 19:38:59 +0000 (UTC) From: Laurent Pinchart To: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2018 22:38:57 +0300 Message-ID: <1877914.JXSoZ9jg4d@avalon> In-Reply-To: <20181009185622.GA20960@localhost> References: <1538861738.4088.5.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <1718828.OxLgMoHbrt@siriux> <20181009185622.GA20960@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: james.bottomley@hansenpartnership.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rainer Fiebig Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH 1/2] code-of-conduct: Fix the ambiguity about collecting email addresses List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi Josh, On Tuesday, 9 October 2018 21:56:23 EEST Josh Triplett wrote: > On Tue, Oct 09, 2018 at 08:29:24PM +0200, Rainer Fiebig wrote: > > Am Montag, 8. Oktober 2018, 08:20:44 schrieb Josh Triplett: > >> On Sat, Oct 06, 2018 at 02:36:39PM -0700, James Bottomley wrote: > >>> The current code of conduct has an ambiguity in the it considers > >>> publishing private information such as email addresses unacceptable > >>> behaviour. Since the Linux kernel collects and publishes email > >>> addresses as part of the patch process, add an exception clause for > >>> email addresses ordinarily collected by the project to correct this > >>> ambiguity. > >> > >> Upstream has now adopted a FAQ, which addresses this and many other > >> questions. See https://www.contributor-covenant.org/faq . > >> > >> Might I suggest adding that link to the bottom of the document, instead? > >> (And then, optionally, submitting entries for that FAQ.) > > > > The Code of Conflict has 28 lines, including the heading. > > The Code of Conduct has 81 lines, including the heading. And it needs a > > FAQ. Hm. > > Yes, it turns out to be a more complicated problem than it was > previously oversimplified to. People don't automatically share a common > understanding. I see an elephant in the room in the fact that we have carefully avoided discussing whether people share a common goal here :-/ -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart