From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jarkko Sakkinen Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3 Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 14:26:05 -0800 Message-ID: <20181130222605.GA26261@linux.intel.com> References: <20181130192737.15053-1-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> <20181130195652.7syqys76646kpaph@linux-r8p5> <20181130205521.GA21006@linux.intel.com> <1543611662.3031.20.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20181130214405.GG23772@linux.intel.com> <1543615069.3031.27.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20181130221219.GA25537@linux.intel.com> <20181130151459.3ca2f5c8@lwn.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20181130151459.3ca2f5c8@lwn.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Jonathan Corbet Cc: James Bottomley , Davidlohr Bueso , Kees Cook , LKML , Amir Goldstein , Andrew Morton , Andy Shevchenko , Daniel Axtens , "David S. Miller" , Dominik Brodowski , Maling list - DRI developers , Eric Dumazet , federico.vaga@vaga.pv.it, Geert Uytterhoeven , Helge Deller , Joshua Kinard , "open list:DOCUMENTATION" , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 03:14:59PM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 14:12:19 -0800 > Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > As a maintainer myself (and based on somewhat disturbed feedback from > > other maintainers) I can only make the conclusion that nobody knows what > > the responsibility part here means. > > > > I would interpret, if I read it like at lawyer at least, that even for > > existing code you would need to do the changes postmorterm. > > > > Is this wrong interpretation? Should I conclude that I made a mistake > > by reading the CoC and trying to understand what it *actually* says? > > After this discussion, I can say that I understand it less than before. > > Have you read Documentation/process/code-of-conduct-interpretation.rst? > As has been pointed out, it contains a clear answer to how things should > be interpreted here. Ugh, was not aware that there two documents. Yeah, definitely sheds light. Why the documents could not be merged to single common sense code of conduct? /Jarkko From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B90F9C04EB8 for ; Fri, 30 Nov 2018 22:26:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8508020863 for ; Fri, 30 Nov 2018 22:26:16 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 8508020863 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-parisc-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726938AbeLAJgy (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Dec 2018 04:36:54 -0500 Received: from mga17.intel.com ([192.55.52.151]:28702 "EHLO mga17.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725867AbeLAJgy (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Dec 2018 04:36:54 -0500 X-Amp-Result: UNKNOWN X-Amp-Original-Verdict: FILE UNKNOWN X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga006.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.20]) by fmsmga107.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 30 Nov 2018 14:26:06 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.56,300,1539673200"; d="scan'208";a="294225326" Received: from jsakkine-mobl1.jf.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.241.225.27]) by fmsmga006.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 30 Nov 2018 14:26:05 -0800 Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 14:26:05 -0800 From: Jarkko Sakkinen To: Jonathan Corbet Cc: James Bottomley , Davidlohr Bueso , Kees Cook , LKML , Amir Goldstein , Andrew Morton , Andy Shevchenko , Daniel Axtens , "David S. Miller" , Dominik Brodowski , Maling list - DRI developers , Eric Dumazet , federico.vaga@vaga.pv.it, Geert Uytterhoeven , Helge Deller , Joshua Kinard , "open list:DOCUMENTATION" , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, Linux Media Mailing List , Linux MIPS Mailing List , Linux mtd , linux-parisc , Linux PM list , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, matthias.bgg@gmail.com, Network Development , nouveau , Paolo Abeni , Paul Burton , Petr Mladek , Rob Herring , sean.wang@mediatek.com, Sergey Senozhatsky , shannon.nelson@oracle.com, Stefano Brivio , Steven Rostedt , "Tobin C. Harding" , makita.toshiaki@lab.ntt.co.jp, Willem de Bruijn , Yonghong Song , yanjun.zhu@oracle.com Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3 Message-ID: <20181130222605.GA26261@linux.intel.com> References: <20181130192737.15053-1-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> <20181130195652.7syqys76646kpaph@linux-r8p5> <20181130205521.GA21006@linux.intel.com> <1543611662.3031.20.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20181130214405.GG23772@linux.intel.com> <1543615069.3031.27.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20181130221219.GA25537@linux.intel.com> <20181130151459.3ca2f5c8@lwn.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20181130151459.3ca2f5c8@lwn.net> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-parisc-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 03:14:59PM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 14:12:19 -0800 > Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > As a maintainer myself (and based on somewhat disturbed feedback from > > other maintainers) I can only make the conclusion that nobody knows what > > the responsibility part here means. > > > > I would interpret, if I read it like at lawyer at least, that even for > > existing code you would need to do the changes postmorterm. > > > > Is this wrong interpretation? Should I conclude that I made a mistake > > by reading the CoC and trying to understand what it *actually* says? > > After this discussion, I can say that I understand it less than before. > > Have you read Documentation/process/code-of-conduct-interpretation.rst? > As has been pointed out, it contains a clear answer to how things should > be interpreted here. Ugh, was not aware that there two documents. Yeah, definitely sheds light. Why the documents could not be merged to single common sense code of conduct? /Jarkko From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jarkko Sakkinen Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3 Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 14:26:05 -0800 Message-ID: <20181130222605.GA26261@linux.intel.com> References: <20181130192737.15053-1-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> <20181130195652.7syqys76646kpaph@linux-r8p5> <20181130205521.GA21006@linux.intel.com> <1543611662.3031.20.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20181130214405.GG23772@linux.intel.com> <1543615069.3031.27.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20181130221219.GA25537@linux.intel.com> <20181130151459.3ca2f5c8@lwn.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: James Bottomley , Davidlohr Bueso , Kees Cook , LKML , Amir Goldstein , Andrew Morton , Andy Shevchenko , Daniel Axtens , "David S. Miller" , Dominik Brodowski , Maling list - DRI developers , Eric Dumazet , federico.vaga@vaga.pv.it, Geert Uytterhoeven , Helge Deller , Joshua Kinard , "open list:DOCUMENTATION" , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" Return-path: Received: from mga17.intel.com ([192.55.52.151]:28702 "EHLO mga17.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725867AbeLAJgy (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Dec 2018 04:36:54 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20181130151459.3ca2f5c8@lwn.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 03:14:59PM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 14:12:19 -0800 > Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > As a maintainer myself (and based on somewhat disturbed feedback from > > other maintainers) I can only make the conclusion that nobody knows what > > the responsibility part here means. > > > > I would interpret, if I read it like at lawyer at least, that even for > > existing code you would need to do the changes postmorterm. > > > > Is this wrong interpretation? Should I conclude that I made a mistake > > by reading the CoC and trying to understand what it *actually* says? > > After this discussion, I can say that I understand it less than before. > > Have you read Documentation/process/code-of-conduct-interpretation.rst? > As has been pointed out, it contains a clear answer to how things should > be interpreted here. Ugh, was not aware that there two documents. Yeah, definitely sheds light. Why the documents could not be merged to single common sense code of conduct? /Jarkko From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mga17.intel.com ([192.55.52.151]:28702 "EHLO mga17.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725867AbeLAJgy (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Dec 2018 04:36:54 -0500 Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 14:26:05 -0800 From: Jarkko Sakkinen To: Jonathan Corbet Cc: James Bottomley , Davidlohr Bueso , Kees Cook , LKML , Amir Goldstein , Andrew Morton , Andy Shevchenko , Daniel Axtens , "David S. Miller" , Dominik Brodowski , Maling list - DRI developers , Eric Dumazet , federico.vaga@vaga.pv.it, Geert Uytterhoeven , Helge Deller , Joshua Kinard , "open list:DOCUMENTATION" , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, Linux Media Mailing List , Linux MIPS Mailing List , Linux mtd , linux-parisc , Linux PM list , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, matthias.bgg@gmail.com, Network Development , nouveau , Paolo Abeni , Paul Burton , Petr Mladek , Rob Herring , sean.wang@mediatek.com, Sergey Senozhatsky , shannon.nelson@oracle.com, Stefano Brivio , Steven Rostedt , "Tobin C. Harding" , makita.toshiaki@lab.ntt.co.jp, Willem de Bruijn , Yonghong Song , yanjun.zhu@oracle.com Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3 Message-ID: <20181130222605.GA26261@linux.intel.com> References: <20181130192737.15053-1-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> <20181130195652.7syqys76646kpaph@linux-r8p5> <20181130205521.GA21006@linux.intel.com> <1543611662.3031.20.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20181130214405.GG23772@linux.intel.com> <1543615069.3031.27.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20181130221219.GA25537@linux.intel.com> <20181130151459.3ca2f5c8@lwn.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20181130151459.3ca2f5c8@lwn.net> Sender: linux-media-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 03:14:59PM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 14:12:19 -0800 > Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > As a maintainer myself (and based on somewhat disturbed feedback from > > other maintainers) I can only make the conclusion that nobody knows what > > the responsibility part here means. > > > > I would interpret, if I read it like at lawyer at least, that even for > > existing code you would need to do the changes postmorterm. > > > > Is this wrong interpretation? Should I conclude that I made a mistake > > by reading the CoC and trying to understand what it *actually* says? > > After this discussion, I can say that I understand it less than before. > > Have you read Documentation/process/code-of-conduct-interpretation.rst? > As has been pointed out, it contains a clear answer to how things should > be interpreted here. Ugh, was not aware that there two documents. Yeah, definitely sheds light. Why the documents could not be merged to single common sense code of conduct? /Jarkko