linux-kernel - Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH v2 2/3] code-of-conduct: Strip the enforcement paragraph pending community discussion

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: <20181010233705.12f0f727@coco.lan>
Date:   Wed, 10 Oct 2018 23:37:05 -0300
From:   Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+samsung@...nel.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 v2 2/3] code-of-conduct: Strip the
 enforcement paragraph pending community discussion

Em Wed, 10 Oct 2018 13:09:40 -0700
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com> escreveu:

> Significant concern has been expressed about the responsibilities outlined in
> the enforcement clause of the new code of conduct.  Since there is concern
> that this becomes binding on the release of the 4.19 kernel, strip the
> enforcement clauses to give the community time to consider and debate how this
> should be handled.
> 
> Note, this patch is expected to be the starting point for a discussion not the
> end point, so there is an expectation that an Enforcement section will be
> added again to our code of conduct once we have sufficient community consensus
> on what it should say.
> 
> Fixes: 8a104f8b5867c682 ("Code of Conduct: Let's revamp it.")
> Acked-by: Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
> Acked-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
> Acked-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
> Reviewed-by: Alan Cox <alan@...yncelyn.cymru>
> Signed-off-by: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>

Reviewed-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>

I still think that this series should contain a 4th patch removing
"responsibilities" with that text proposed by Alan.

E. g. instead of:

	Maintainers have the right and responsibility to remove, edit, or reject

it should say, instead:

	Maintainers should remove, edit or reject

> 
> ---
> 
> v2: Added additional commit paragraph clarifying we do expect eventually to
>     have an enforcement section (as requested by Shuah)
> ---
>  Documentation/process/code-of-conduct.rst | 15 ---------------
>  1 file changed, 15 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/process/code-of-conduct.rst b/Documentation/process/code-of-conduct.rst
> index aa40e34e7785..4dd90987305b 100644
> --- a/Documentation/process/code-of-conduct.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/process/code-of-conduct.rst
> @@ -59,21 +59,6 @@ address, posting via an official social media account, or acting as an appointed
>  representative at an online or offline event. Representation of a project may be
>  further defined and clarified by project maintainers.
>  
> -Enforcement
> -===========
> -
> -Instances of abusive, harassing, or otherwise unacceptable behavior may be
> -reported by contacting the Technical Advisory Board (TAB) at
> -<tab@...ts.linux-foundation.org>. All complaints will be reviewed and
> -investigated and will result in a response that is deemed necessary and
> -appropriate to the circumstances. The TAB is obligated to maintain
> -confidentiality with regard to the reporter of an incident.  Further details of
> -specific enforcement policies may be posted separately.
> -
> -Maintainers who do not follow or enforce the Code of Conduct in good faith may
> -face temporary or permanent repercussions as determined by other members of the
> -project’s leadership.
> -
>  Attribution
>  ===========
>  



Thanks,
Mauro