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

[Dave Airlie]

On Sun, 7 Oct 2018 at 07:36, James Bottomley
<James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> From 4a614e9440148894207bef5bf69e74071baceb3b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2018 14:21:56 -0700
> Subject: [PATCH 1/2] code-of-conduct: Fix the ambiguity about collecting email
>  addresses
>
> 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.
>
> Signed-off-by: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  Documentation/process/code-of-conduct.rst | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/process/code-of-conduct.rst b/Documentation/process/code-of-conduct.rst
> index ab7c24b5478c..aa40e34e7785 100644
> --- a/Documentation/process/code-of-conduct.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/process/code-of-conduct.rst
> @@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ Examples of unacceptable behavior by participants include:
>  * Trolling, insulting/derogatory comments, and personal or political attacks
>  * Public or private harassment
>  * Publishing othersâ private information, such as a physical or electronic
> -  address, without explicit permission
> +  address not ordinarily collected by the project, without explicit permission
>  * Other conduct which could reasonably be considered inappropriate in a
>    professional setting
>

I agree we want something like this, the question is whether we want
to change the CoC text from upstream, or clarify it in a separate
section.

This isn't a legally binding license or anything, but departing from
the upstream wording makes it tricker to merge new upstream versions
if they are considered appropriate.

Dave.