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=-5.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,URIBL_SBL,URIBL_SBL_A 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 84FE9C5ACCC for ; Wed, 17 Oct 2018 02:10:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DDD4214C4 for ; Wed, 17 Oct 2018 02:10:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="Uit1miuJ" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 2DDD4214C4 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.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 S1727426AbeJQKEB (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Oct 2018 06:04:01 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-f194.google.com ([209.85.210.194]:39595 "EHLO mail-pf1-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727086AbeJQKEB (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Oct 2018 06:04:01 -0400 Received: by mail-pf1-f194.google.com with SMTP id c25-v6so12379623pfe.6 for ; Tue, 16 Oct 2018 19:10:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=zLTABFwy3vrrD2Njv1EGBGlAlc1lXEBaAna0RJh02S8=; b=Uit1miuJZ2X27QFdE2vdYIdZuThQV/GN5X+ju+cLCh8UY8gF7vJRkfg7q/Aj/X1l1e KGAubbR9VR3OuWIvF/mZ17JFbHLg8jZ7Ki720NPX4idSjZhNvWFG8AFlBlrt7Hv9+Cyi 2Dd6W+93BET4y/prDiCO7hbrr7BTMBtw1EBqmoJBpibJl45NW2AAE/nkyQcGiNvE28IW gvHYE9hFkct69oP9rZ2miAIwvDIAYsferRQaQtWEhVozeo7pUa6o5lSt9eRGzNYJtcY5 MxroqkSoUuPxwcSvLnh/oJjGFFLxfa4bB7AGMPGYRaHLAENi2ee+9aVisw/c0SKbpnDL H+Yw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=zLTABFwy3vrrD2Njv1EGBGlAlc1lXEBaAna0RJh02S8=; b=r6+O4XbJJetuOzh4nFn+aUnXF+2sXlVO18ztqfXTTNKIdvqTm68Thqu1pFWzn9T6qE Mr3wSC5xnYLWOG3M+06oIetJR2rjitrggSmjGHXM+oemMOMXSjWxqJc/uN/nbiEbHbAr lQG7arUhgHA/p4OaO2UB5eW7s2SnOhd5rNIzic8KwBYE6KX1q28fD5rTBCyin8ammlgE SyuaNwQt9IvOEM0h+c/leCpvMgIMTul2e1x8v+Omg2vERPL2VWHsTuLNVTDYYqRNi8y/ LXjEznKGg8MGbTaIBqdStax7nhKE2fRa93yrU7lOqNECcn21IJxsg1KTycTmm7/zq98m 3eiA== X-Gm-Message-State: ABuFfoj6jQqWYIHQANEjT1uCAut6FjD02MlmjS43meQ6x1U54UXGPmGj 7uOLvgk9RRl8jJAnGpYiwkGTOjmU X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACcGV62+77yY6v0Nq2lgSGjBGDw12lencEshtiXhUi18y89WLlNJkZydVcugT5MSfa8Oepy8lQLXmg== X-Received: by 2002:a63:4d5b:: with SMTP id n27-v6mr22646549pgl.270.1539742241035; Tue, 16 Oct 2018 19:10:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.70] (c-24-6-192-50.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [24.6.192.50]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v81-v6sm27487612pfj.25.2018.10.16.19.10.40 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 16 Oct 2018 19:10:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH v3 1/3] code-of-conduct: Fix the ambiguity about collecting email addresses To: James Bottomley , ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org Cc: linux-kernel References: <1539701820.2805.6.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <1539701896.2805.7.camel@HansenPartnership.com> From: Frank Rowand Message-ID: Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2018 19:10:39 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1539701896.2805.7.camel@HansenPartnership.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/16/18 07:58, James Bottomley wrote: > 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. > > Fixes: 8a104f8b5867c682 ("Code of Conduct: Let's revamp it.") > Acked-by: Geert Uytterhoeven > Acked-by: Shuah Khan > Acked-by: Guenter Roeck > Reviewed-by: Alan Cox > Reviewed-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab > Acked-by: "Eric W. Biederman" > Acked-by: Kees Cook > Signed-off-by: James Bottomley > --- > 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 > > Repeating my comment on version 1: My understanding of the concern behind this change is that we should be able to use an email address for the current development practices, such as Reported-by, Suggested-by, etc tags when the email address was provided in what is a public space for the project. The public space is visible to anyone in the world who desires to access it. I do not understand how "ordinarily collected by the project" is equivalent to "an email address that was provided in a public space for the project". Ordinarily collected could include activities that can be expected to be private and not visible to any arbitrary person in the world. My issue is with the word choice. I agree with the underlying concept. -Frank