From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 640D1C46464 for ; Thu, 11 Oct 2018 10:42:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AB7B20841 for ; Thu, 11 Oct 2018 10:42:35 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mailbox.org header.i=@mailbox.org header.b="s8TRRTPQ" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 1AB7B20841 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=mailbox.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728484AbeJKSJM (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:09:12 -0400 Received: from mx2.mailbox.org ([80.241.60.215]:44708 "EHLO mx2.mailbox.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727796AbeJKSJM (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:09:12 -0400 Received: from smtp1.mailbox.org (smtp1.mailbox.org [80.241.60.240]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx2.mailbox.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 16A8340719; Thu, 11 Oct 2018 12:42:29 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=mailbox.org; h= content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :references:in-reply-to:message-id:date:date:subject:subject :from:from:received; s=mail20150812; t=1539254545; bh=dYOdwvUrrd GOwCyibk+kKTAadUhocrlWJ/K9UWVMSpY=; b=s8TRRTPQJKNpurYyx7gyoxWAJv 4sEfqSznsA/wUZXeiLhM5VEpIlDKTWKBIoqEDPNnMO9QsUBpS3qxGm9fdFVLBQk0 Qy+NYTrvI3jeS/+A2vKFVOiRT7x6j9O0snXMrupt30gYc8Alh3DzDYX4nXHPDp27 IkZ6kvkOgkswCQjATNhYh+m1Wop+ji3qRwjO754xBina2ShgNFQn39Z3b44ur4nl 7NZqGNTBD+bhBqh+4sAaPYAAkAeiZdfH7rZTRdozDCnlhZsI+mhrbpZtNoNxqB9W 8CageyoCupGsdH/Oqw2fzMb2Jr29gTcVoNhqu5LRH9AZl9LRDdpFfpmgu+hA== X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at heinlein-support.de Received: from smtp1.mailbox.org ([80.241.60.240]) by spamfilter03.heinlein-hosting.de (spamfilter03.heinlein-hosting.de [80.241.56.117]) (amavisd-new, port 10030) with ESMTP id Y5e_7EHg9Wa4; Thu, 11 Oct 2018 12:42:25 +0200 (CEST) From: Rainer Fiebig To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" , James Bottomley , ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH v2 0/3] code of conduct fixes Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2018 12:43:45 +0200 Message-ID: <8067297.9B3jLnrCay@siriux> In-Reply-To: <87efcxtmhf.fsf@xmission.com> References: <1539202053.12644.8.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <87efcxtmhf.fsf@xmission.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Am Mittwoch, 10. Oktober 2018, 18:23:24 schrieb Eric W. Biederman: > James Bottomley writes: > > > Resend to show accumulated tags and also to add a third patch listing > > the TAB as the reporting point as a few people seem to want. If it > > gets the same level of support, I'll send it in with the other two. > > > There is also: > > > Our Responsibilities > > ==================== > > > > 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 unacceptable behavior. > > > > Maintainers have the right and responsibility to remove, edit, or reject > > comments, commits, code, wiki edits, issues, and other contributions that are > > not aligned to this Code of Conduct, or to ban temporarily or permanently any > > contributor for other behaviors that they deem inappropriate, threatening, > > offensive, or harmful. > > Which is very problematic. > a) In append only logs like git we can not edit history. > Making it a mainters responsibility to edit the history, to do the > impossible is a problem. > > b) There are no responsibilities of for people who are not Maintainers. > That is another problem. > As a reminder/clarification one could introduce a line like this: Responsibilities ================ All participants are responsible for complying with this Code of Conduct. Maintainers are responsible for[...] > c) The entire tone of the reponsibilities section is out of line with a > community where there are no enforcement powers only the power to > accept or not accept a patch. Only the power to persuade not to > enforce. > > Overall in the discussions I have heard people talking about persuading, > educating, and not feeding trolls. Nowhere have I heard people talking > about policing the community which I understand that responsiblity > section to be talking about. > I think Eward Cree aired this concerns early on in the discussion: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/9/19/234 > Increasingly I am getting the feeling that this document does not the > linux development community. Perhaps a revert and trying to come up > with better language from scratch would be better. [...] +1. Nobody would get hurt or loose face by doing so. On the contrary. My suggestion would be: - revert the patch - discuss the matter (and the way it was introduced) at least at the next MS - setup a task-force to come up with a new proposal - discuss the proposal - make corrections, if necessary - implement it IMO there's no need to rush things in a matter so important for the future of the project. So long! Rainer Fiebig -- The truth always turns out to be simpler than you thought. Richard Feynman