linux-kernel - Re: [Ksummit-discuss] The linux devs can rescind their license grant.

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: <875zxl4vwf.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name>
Date:   Mon, 29 Oct 2018 08:13:36 +1100
From:   NeilBrown <neil@...wn.name>
To:     Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>, Tim.Bird@...y.com
Cc:     viro@...IV.linux.org.uk, visionsofalice@...chan.it,
        linux-kernel-owner@...r.kernel.org, rms@....org,
        ksummit-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org, mishi@...ux.com,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, bruce@...ens.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, esr@...rsus.com, moglen@...umbia.edu,
        bkuhn@...onservancy.org, editor@....net
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] The linux devs can rescind their license grant.

On Sun, Oct 28 2018, Jiri Kosina wrote:

> On Sat, 27 Oct 2018, Tim.Bird@...y.com wrote:
>
>> Al,
>>
>> Can you please, even in the face of comments you find irritating, keep 
>> your responses more civil?  Calling someone a "wankstain" is 
>> unprofessional
>
> Tim,
>
> to be completely honest, communicating anonymously doesn't really match my 
> "this is highly professional" standards either, so I don't think we should 
> be losing too much sleep over this particular e-mail exchange.

I agree with Tim here.  It doesn't really matter who (or what) you are
talking to, what matters is the context in which you are talking.

We seem to be trying to raise the standard of communication within the
kernel community.  That means all communication.

>
> CoC explicitly requires us to be reasonably nice to the human being on the 
> other end of the wire, which I whole-heartedly believe is a very noble and 
> nice goal. But you really have to know at least a little bit who's there 
> on the other end. Otherwise failure to communicate might be sort of 
> inevitable.

As you know, I think the CoC is a mistake and should be removed.
But seeing you to play that game:
1/ code-of-conduct.rst doesn't contain the word "human" at all
2/ code-of-conduect-interpretation.rst explicitly says
    We know everyone is human
  which could be read as implying that you need to treat the other
  person as human, even if they don't act that way.

Do you *really* want to use the CoC to support your position?

Thanks,
NeilBrown


>
> -- 
> Jiri Kosina
> SUSE Labs

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (833 bytes)