James Bottomley schrieb: > On Tue, 2018-10-09 at 22:38 +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: >> Hi Josh, >> >> On Tuesday, 9 October 2018 21:56:23 EEST Josh Triplett wrote: >>> On Tue, Oct 09, 2018 at 08:29:24PM +0200, Rainer Fiebig wrote: >>>> Am Montag, 8. Oktober 2018, 08:20:44 schrieb Josh Triplett: >>>>> On Sat, Oct 06, 2018 at 02:36:39PM -0700, James Bottomley >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> 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. >>>>> >>>>> Upstream has now adopted a FAQ, which addresses this and many >>>>> other questions. See https://www.contributor-covenant.org/faq . >>>>> >>>>> Might I suggest adding that link to the bottom of the document, >>>>> instead? (And then, optionally, submitting entries for that >>>>> FAQ.) >>>> >>>> The Code of Conflict has 28 lines, including the heading. >>>> The Code of Conduct has 81 lines, including the heading. And it >>>> needs a FAQ. Hm. >>> >>> Yes, it turns out to be a more complicated problem than it was >>> previously oversimplified to. People don't automatically share a >>> common understanding. >> >> I see an elephant in the room in the fact that we have carefully >> avoided discussing whether people share a common goal here :-/ > > We don't need to share a common goal; we just need to find the It wouldn't hurt to have one and mention it either.
> document useful on its merits. That's why we're a mostly GPLv2 > project without signing up to most of the FSF philosophy. However, > that's also why we would keep our own interpretations, understandings > and clarifications in house, as it were. > > James > Sure. So long! Rainer Fiebig