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 04BA711DF for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2018 19:29:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A76A079 for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2018 19:29:54 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2018 16:29:48 -0300 From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab To: James Bottomley Message-ID: <20180918162948.769dda1d@coco.lan> In-Reply-To: <1537279328.3424.6.camel@HansenPartnership.com> References: <1537279328.3424.6.camel@HansenPartnership.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: ksummit Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINER TOPIC FOR KS] CoC and Linus position (perhaps undocumented/closed/limited/invite session) List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Em Tue, 18 Sep 2018 10:02:08 -0400 James Bottomley escreveu: > > After the past 2-3 days I get the feeling there are maintainers > > unsure about how this affects them and I think assuaging those fears > > might be a good thing. > >=20 > From my perspective, which is probably fairly widespread: we're already > pretty much policing the lists using a set of rules which match fairly > closely to the new CoC, so there should really be no huge impact. After carefully reading it a couple of times, I think it has a huge impact. The more immediate impact is with regards to this wording: "Examples of unacceptable behavior by participants include: ... * Publishing others=E2=80=99 private information, such as a physical or el= ectronic address, without explicit permission" When we publish a patch with a Signed-off-by, Reviewed-by, Acked-by, Requested-by, Suggested-by, etc, we are actually publishing an electronic address. The DCO 1.1 has an explicit clause that would allow to publish the email address from the SOB's, together to its redistribution: " (d) I understand and agree that this project and the contribution are public and that a record of the contribution (including all personal information I submit with it, including my sign-off) is maintained indefinitely and may be redistributed consistent with this project or the open source license(s) involved." But that doesn't cover the other tags. We should solve this quickly, as otherwise maintainers may need to postpone asking for pulling from any branches on trees that contain patches with such tags. Thanks, Mauro