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=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham 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 59575C65C20 for ; Mon, 8 Oct 2018 17:06:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 142E32075E for ; Mon, 8 Oct 2018 17:06:02 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 142E32075E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726537AbeJIASj convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Oct 2018 20:18:39 -0400 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:61852 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726348AbeJIASj (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Oct 2018 20:18:39 -0400 X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga006.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.20]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 08 Oct 2018 10:05:59 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.54,357,1534834800"; d="scan'208";a="270550246" Received: from orsmsx108.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.22.240.6]) by fmsmga006.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 08 Oct 2018 10:05:59 -0700 Received: from orsmsx115.amr.corp.intel.com (10.22.240.11) by ORSMSX108.amr.corp.intel.com (10.22.240.6) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.319.2; Mon, 8 Oct 2018 10:05:59 -0700 Received: from orsmsx107.amr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.1.14]) by ORSMSX115.amr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.4.116]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Mon, 8 Oct 2018 10:05:59 -0700 From: "Luck, Tony" To: Al Viro , Dave Airlie CC: James Bottomley , LKML , ksummit Subject: RE: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH 1/2] code-of-conduct: Fix the ambiguity about collecting email addresses Thread-Topic: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH 1/2] code-of-conduct: Fix the ambiguity about collecting email addresses Thread-Index: AQHUXbyz/O8WjoAECEan4x4+MNmuk6UU0zSAgAAIj4CAALoWMA== Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2018 17:05:58 +0000 Message-ID: <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F7D409730@ORSMSX107.amr.corp.intel.com> References: <1538861738.4088.5.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <1538861799.4088.6.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20181007225613.GZ32577@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20181007225613.GZ32577@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiZWYwODcwZGMtNzZiNy00NTA3LTgwMWQtYjM2MzkyZGUyYjM4IiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX05UIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE3LjEwLjE4MDQuNDkiLCJUcnVzdGVkTGFiZWxIYXNoIjoiSWZyY2IrR2QzWEJkQTZuaHg4cnlsVFRhMXlwXC9DenZWbmVzTm43YmJuM210UW8rYVAzdWlQaGxUSkU4aENDU1QifQ== x-ctpclassification: CTP_NT dlp-product: dlpe-windows dlp-version: 11.0.400.15 dlp-reaction: no-action x-originating-ip: [10.22.254.138] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Oct 08, 2018 at 08:25:35AM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote: > This isn't a legally binding license or anything, but departing from > the upstream wording makes it tricker to merge new upstream versions > if they are considered appropriate. The whole document is under 500 words, if we can manage merges of tens of thousands of lines of code, this should be pretty easy by comparison. Making it difficult to merge new upstream versions could also be considered a positive thing. Given the outcry about this version appearing with no community discussion, I think folks will also be unhappy about finding some future merge that just says "Update CoC to upstream 1.5". -Tony