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]
Date:   Mon, 22 Oct 2018 11:09:26 +0200
From:   Rainer Fiebig <jrf@...lbox.org>
To:     NeilBrown <neil@...wn.name>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        ksummit-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>, Chris Mason <clm@...com>,
        Mishi Choudhary <mishi@...ux.com>
Subject: Re: Call to Action Re: [PATCH 0/7] Code of Conduct: Fix some wording, and add an interpretation document

Am Montag, 22. Oktober 2018, 08:20:11 schrieb NeilBrown:
> On Sat, Oct 20 2018, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > As everyone knows by now, we added a new Code of Conduct to the kernel
> > tree a few weeks ago.
> 
> I wanted to stay detached from all this, but as remaining (publicly)

And I didn't expect myself to ever post in this matter again, as I had
already given up and relegated it to the "waste of precious lifetime" 
category. But your initiative and courage deserve support and so:

+1.

> I call on the community to consider what *does* need to be said, about
> conduct, to people outside the community and who have recently joined.
> What is the document that you would have liked to have read as you were
> starting out?  It is all too long ago for me to remember clearly, and so
> much has changed.

On the day the patch came out, I started working on a modified version, 
a CoC that I could have lived with. I guess this was my way of dealing 
with this unfortunate affair. 

So please find below what I would have submitted for discussion.

Thanks and regards!

Rainer Fiebig


Disclosure
==========
My contribution to the Linux kernel is admittedly negligible: I run rc-
kernels, have reported a few problems, helped to fix them and fixed one 
myself. To the extent of the time and effort this took me, I dare to give 
my opinion in this matter. 

---


Code of Conduct
+++++++++++++++

The goal of the Linux kernel development process is to maintain and advance
the most robust operating system kernel ever.

Needless to say, views on how to achieve this will differ at times.

In order to keep arguments civilized and to ensure an open, positive 
and constructive environment, we have setup guidelines 
that participants are expected to comply with:

No bias
=======

Nobody must be discriminated or favored due to personal traits like
- for example - age, gender or ethnicity. They are irrelevant.
What counts is whether the contribution is in line with a/m goal.
Any such contribution will be carefully reviewed.

Be excellent to each other
==========================

Don't do to others what you don't want others to do to you.
Straightforward talk is fine. But dissent can be communicated in a 
non-destructive manner. And keep in mind that at times it may be *you* 
who is dead wrong.

Examples of encouraged behavior:

* Being respectful of differing viewpoints
* Criticizing constructively, i. e. showing ways for improvement
* Accepting constructive criticism
* Focusing on what is best for our goal and the community

Examples of unacceptable behavior:

* Comments intended to insult, depreciate or defame a person
* Public or private harassment
* Unwelcome sexual attention or advances
* Fabricating incriminations by quoting out of context
* Publishing others’ private information, such as a physical or electronic
  address, without explicit permission
* Promoting political agendas
* Trolling

Responsibilities
================

All participants are responsible for complying with this Code of Conduct.

Maintainers are responsible for clarifying the standards of acceptable 
behavior and are expected to take appropriate and fair corrective action in 
response to any instances of obviously unacceptable behavior.

Maintainers have the right to ban temporarily or permanently any contributor 
who's behavior is not aligned to this Code of Conduct.

Arbitration
===========

Anyone who feels abused, harassed or affected by otherwise unacceptable 
behavior may report this to 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 arbitration policies may be posted separately.

Attribution
===========

Some elements of this Code of Conduct are derived from the Contributor 
Covenant, version 1.4, available at https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-conduct.html

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ