linux-kernel - Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH 1/2] code-of-conduct: Fix the ambiguity about collecting email addresses

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20181008152043.GA5796@localhost>
Date:   Mon, 8 Oct 2018 08:20:44 -0700
From:   Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>
To:     James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
Cc:     ksummit-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH 1/2] code-of-conduct: Fix the ambiguity
 about collecting email addresses

On Sat, Oct 06, 2018 at 02:36:39PM -0700, 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.

Upstream has now adopted a FAQ, which addresses this and many other
questions. See https://www.contributor-covenant.org/faq .

Might I suggest adding that link to the bottom of the document, instead?
(And then, optionally, submitting entries for that FAQ.)