From: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.com>
To: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
ksummit <ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH 1/2] code-of-conduct: Fix the ambiguity about collecting email addresses
Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2018 11:54:02 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b0bb3179-6bf5-3a85-9567-b0a73e1c3e9d@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKMK7uGvgttqL_RoXumd0F4w8UMqwaVODaMWnOZz5weSFzDJ2A@mail.gmail.com>
On 10/7/18 11:04 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 6, 2018 at 11:36 PM James Bottomley
> <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com> wrote:
>>
>> From 4a614e9440148894207bef5bf69e74071baceb3b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
>> Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2018 14:21:56 -0700
>> Subject: [PATCH 1/2] code-of-conduct: Fix the ambiguity about collecting email
>> addresses
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
>> ---
>> Documentation/process/code-of-conduct.rst | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/process/code-of-conduct.rst b/Documentation/process/code-of-conduct.rst
>> index ab7c24b5478c..aa40e34e7785 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/process/code-of-conduct.rst
>> +++ b/Documentation/process/code-of-conduct.rst
>> @@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ Examples of unacceptable behavior by participants include:
>> * Trolling, insulting/derogatory comments, and personal or political attacks
>> * Public or private harassment
>> * Publishing others’ private information, such as a physical or electronic
>> - address, without explicit permission
>> + address not ordinarily collected by the project, without explicit permission
>> * Other conduct which could reasonably be considered inappropriate in a
>> professional setting
>
> We've discussed this a bit with freedesktop.org people a while ago,
> both from a CoC and privacy regulations pov, and we concluded that
> attaching random people's emails in Reported-by: and similar lines,
> without their consent, is indeed a problem. Bugzilla is rather
> problematic in this way, since it looks like it's protecting your
> email address and keeping it private, but then you can still just grab
> it from the bugzilla emails without first asking for permission.
> That's one of the reasons why fd.o admins want to retire Bugzilla in
> favour of gitlab issues (where this is handled a lot more strictly).
>
> What we discussed in the older thread here on ksummit-discuss is
> making it clear that email addresses sent to public mailing lists are
> considered public information, which I think is worth clarifying. But
> what you're excempting here is anything collected without permission
> in the past, which I don't think is a good wording. I've definitely
> been skimping on the rules here in the past. At least in my
> understanding of the legal situation, if you get a bug report through
> a private channel, or at least a channel that hides private address
> information (like Bugzilla does, albeit sloppily), then you do have to
> ask for explicit consent to publishing that information.
That is my interpretation, too.
And it even says so in Documentation/submitting-patches.rst, do I don't
we need to clarify it further.
Cheers,
Hannes
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-07 9:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 59+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-10-06 21:35 [PATCH 0/2] code of conduct fixes James Bottomley
2018-10-06 21:36 ` [PATCH 1/2] code-of-conduct: Fix the ambiguity about collecting email addresses James Bottomley
2018-10-07 8:25 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-10-07 15:25 ` Shuah Khan
2018-10-07 9:04 ` Daniel Vetter
2018-10-07 9:54 ` Hannes Reinecke [this message]
2018-10-07 15:29 ` James Bottomley
2018-10-08 19:49 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-07 17:53 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-10-07 22:25 ` Dave Airlie
2018-10-07 22:56 ` Al Viro
2018-10-07 23:02 ` Al Viro
2018-10-07 23:37 ` Dave Airlie
2018-10-08 10:14 ` Mark Brown
2018-10-08 19:32 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-08 17:05 ` Luck, Tony
2018-10-08 14:08 ` James Bottomley
2018-10-10 16:36 ` Pavel Machek
2018-10-08 15:20 ` Josh Triplett
2018-10-08 15:30 ` James Bottomley
2018-10-08 19:23 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-08 19:57 ` Josh Triplett
2018-10-09 10:55 ` Mark Brown
2018-10-09 18:29 ` Rainer Fiebig
2018-10-09 18:56 ` Josh Triplett
2018-10-09 19:38 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-10-09 19:44 ` James Bottomley
2018-10-10 7:22 ` Rainer Fiebig
2018-10-10 5:52 ` Rainer Fiebig
2018-10-10 7:08 ` Rainer Fiebig
2018-10-08 19:24 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-10 20:48 ` Frank Rowand
2018-10-06 21:37 ` [PATCH 2/2] code-of-conduct: Strip the enforcement paragraph pending community discussion James Bottomley
2018-10-06 21:43 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " Tim.Bird
2018-10-07 3:33 ` James Bottomley
2018-10-08 13:51 ` Tim.Bird
2018-10-08 14:09 ` James Bottomley
2018-10-08 17:58 ` Tim.Bird
2018-10-08 18:11 ` James Bottomley
2018-10-08 18:54 ` Tim.Bird
2018-10-08 15:03 ` jonsmirl
2018-10-08 15:37 ` Alan Cox
2018-10-11 7:42 ` Dan Carpenter
2018-10-07 15:32 ` Shuah Khan
2018-10-07 17:56 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-10-07 19:51 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-10-08 18:15 ` Chris Mason
2018-10-08 19:04 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " Josh Triplett
2018-10-08 20:23 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-10 15:53 ` Alan Cox
2018-10-10 17:19 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-10 20:09 ` Alan Cox
2018-10-10 20:30 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-07 17:11 ` [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH 0/2] code of conduct fixes Daniel Vetter
2018-10-07 17:40 ` James Bottomley
2018-10-07 17:50 ` jonsmirl
2018-10-07 17:52 ` Daniel Vetter
2018-10-10 16:12 ` Pavel Machek
2018-10-10 16:25 ` Randy Dunlap
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=b0bb3179-6bf5-3a85-9567-b0a73e1c3e9d@suse.com \
--to=hare@suse.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
--cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).