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 C5161DBA for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2018 21:15:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from relay9-d.mail.gandi.net (relay9-d.mail.gandi.net [217.70.183.199]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 32C4F80D for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2018 21:15:22 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2018 14:15:09 -0700 From: Josh Triplett To: Mauro Carvalho Chehab Message-ID: <20180918211508.GA7457@localhost> References: <1537279328.3424.6.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20180918162948.769dda1d@coco.lan> <20180918193644.GA5400@localhost> <20180918165203.69de8cc4@coco.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180918165203.69de8cc4@coco.lan> Cc: James Bottomley , 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: , On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 04:52:03PM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > Em Tue, 18 Sep 2018 12:36:45 -0700 > Josh Triplett escreveu: > > Nonetheless, it probably couldn't hurt to have some notes on this > > situation somewhere. > > Yes, that's my point: that part of the CoC should explicitly exclude any > electronic addresses that are used on public community-related channels, > specially on e-mail [1]. s/that part of the CoC should/we should (in accompanying documentation on how we apply it/, but otherwise yes. (By way of analogy, the GPL FAQ is not part of the GPL.)