linux-kernel - [PATCH] Fix Code of Conduct ambiguities

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20181014185241.4085197-1-ichavero@chavero.com.mx>
Date:   Sun, 14 Oct 2018 13:52:41 -0500
From:   Ivan Chavero <ichavero@...vero.com.mx>
To:     corbet@....net
Cc:     linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
        Ivan Chavero <ichavero@...vero.com.mx>
Subject: [PATCH] Fix Code of Conduct ambiguities

The language and focus of the CoC has some ambiguities that
could lead to conflicts that might distract maintainers and
contributors attention from the technical nature of the
Linux kernel.
This patch aims to clarify this problems and focus the document
to a more possitive, healthy and technical standpoint.

Signed-off-by: Ivan Chavero <ichavero@...vero.com.mx>
---
 Documentation/process/code-of-conduct.rst | 33 ++++++++++++-----------
 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/process/code-of-conduct.rst b/Documentation/process/code-of-conduct.rst
index ab7c24b5478c..78d7dbe3fee3 100644
--- a/Documentation/process/code-of-conduct.rst
+++ b/Documentation/process/code-of-conduct.rst
@@ -6,10 +6,12 @@ Our Pledge
 
 In the interest of fostering an open and welcoming environment, we as
 contributors and maintainers pledge to making participation in our project and
-our community a harassment-free experience for everyone, regardless of age, body
-size, disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and
-expression, level of experience, education, socio-economic status, nationality,
-personal appearance, race, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
+our community an effective and enriching experience to any sentient being
+in the Universe.
+Technical excellence should be the main focus of the community and any topics
+and discussions outside of the technical scope should not be relevant to the
+goals of the project.
+
 
 Our Standards
 =============
@@ -17,23 +19,22 @@ Our Standards
 Examples of behavior that contributes to creating a positive environment
 include:
 
-* Using welcoming and inclusive language
-* Being respectful of differing viewpoints and experiences
-* Gracefully accepting constructive criticism
-* Focusing on what is best for the community
-* Showing empathy towards other community members
+* Using welcoming and inclusive language.
+* Being respectful of differing viewpoints and experiences.
+* Gracefully accepting constructive criticism.
+* Focusing on what is best for the community.
+* Showing empathy towards other community members.
+* Use facts instead of opinions.
 
 
 Examples of unacceptable behavior by participants include:
 
-* The use of sexualized language or imagery and unwelcome sexual attention or
-  advances
-* Trolling, insulting/derogatory comments, and personal or political attacks
-* Public or private harassment
+* Public or private harassment.
 * Publishing others’ private information, such as a physical or electronic
-  address, without explicit permission
-* Other conduct which could reasonably be considered inappropriate in a
-  professional setting
+  address, without explicit permission.
+* Discussion of topics that are not relevant to the focus of the project.
+* The use of gender, racial or any other non technical argument in order
+  to win a technical debate.
 
 
 Our Responsibilities
-- 
2.17.2