forked from Qortal/Brooklyn
You can not select more than 25 topics
Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.
156 lines
7.2 KiB
156 lines
7.2 KiB
.. _code_of_conduct_interpretation: |
|
|
|
Linux Kernel Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct Interpretation |
|
================================================================ |
|
|
|
The :ref:`code_of_conduct` is a general document meant to |
|
provide a set of rules for almost any open source community. Every |
|
open-source community is unique and the Linux kernel is no exception. |
|
Because of this, this document describes how we in the Linux kernel |
|
community will interpret it. We also do not expect this interpretation |
|
to be static over time, and will adjust it as needed. |
|
|
|
The Linux kernel development effort is a very personal process compared |
|
to "traditional" ways of developing software. Your contributions and |
|
ideas behind them will be carefully reviewed, often resulting in |
|
critique and criticism. The review will almost always require |
|
improvements before the material can be included in the |
|
kernel. Know that this happens because everyone involved wants to see |
|
the best possible solution for the overall success of Linux. This |
|
development process has been proven to create the most robust operating |
|
system kernel ever, and we do not want to do anything to cause the |
|
quality of submission and eventual result to ever decrease. |
|
|
|
Maintainers |
|
----------- |
|
|
|
The Code of Conduct uses the term "maintainers" numerous times. In the |
|
kernel community, a "maintainer" is anyone who is responsible for a |
|
subsystem, driver, or file, and is listed in the MAINTAINERS file in the |
|
kernel source tree. |
|
|
|
Responsibilities |
|
---------------- |
|
|
|
The Code of Conduct mentions rights and responsibilities for |
|
maintainers, and this needs some further clarifications. |
|
|
|
First and foremost, it is a reasonable expectation to have maintainers |
|
lead by example. |
|
|
|
That being said, our community is vast and broad, and there is no new |
|
requirement for maintainers to unilaterally handle how other people |
|
behave in the parts of the community where they are active. That |
|
responsibility is upon all of us, and ultimately the Code of Conduct |
|
documents final escalation paths in case of unresolved concerns |
|
regarding conduct issues. |
|
|
|
Maintainers should be willing to help when problems occur, and work with |
|
others in the community when needed. Do not be afraid to reach out to |
|
the Technical Advisory Board (TAB) or other maintainers if you're |
|
uncertain how to handle situations that come up. It will not be |
|
considered a violation report unless you want it to be. If you are |
|
uncertain about approaching the TAB or any other maintainers, please |
|
reach out to our conflict mediator, Mishi Choudhary <[email protected]>. |
|
|
|
In the end, "be kind to each other" is really what the end goal is for |
|
everybody. We know everyone is human and we all fail at times, but the |
|
primary goal for all of us should be to work toward amicable resolutions |
|
of problems. Enforcement of the code of conduct will only be a last |
|
resort option. |
|
|
|
Our goal of creating a robust and technically advanced operating system |
|
and the technical complexity involved naturally require expertise and |
|
decision-making. |
|
|
|
The required expertise varies depending on the area of contribution. It |
|
is determined mainly by context and technical complexity and only |
|
secondary by the expectations of contributors and maintainers. |
|
|
|
Both the expertise expectations and decision-making are subject to |
|
discussion, but at the very end there is a basic necessity to be able to |
|
make decisions in order to make progress. This prerogative is in the |
|
hands of maintainers and project's leadership and is expected to be used |
|
in good faith. |
|
|
|
As a consequence, setting expertise expectations, making decisions and |
|
rejecting unsuitable contributions are not viewed as a violation of the |
|
Code of Conduct. |
|
|
|
While maintainers are in general welcoming to newcomers, their capacity |
|
of helping contributors overcome the entry hurdles is limited, so they |
|
have to set priorities. This, also, is not to be seen as a violation of |
|
the Code of Conduct. The kernel community is aware of that and provides |
|
entry level programs in various forms like kernelnewbies.org. |
|
|
|
Scope |
|
----- |
|
|
|
The Linux kernel community primarily interacts on a set of public email |
|
lists distributed around a number of different servers controlled by a |
|
number of different companies or individuals. All of these lists are |
|
defined in the MAINTAINERS file in the kernel source tree. Any emails |
|
sent to those mailing lists are considered covered by the Code of |
|
Conduct. |
|
|
|
Developers who use the kernel.org bugzilla, and other subsystem bugzilla |
|
or bug tracking tools should follow the guidelines of the Code of |
|
Conduct. The Linux kernel community does not have an "official" project |
|
email address, or "official" social media address. Any activity |
|
performed using a kernel.org email account must follow the Code of |
|
Conduct as published for kernel.org, just as any individual using a |
|
corporate email account must follow the specific rules of that |
|
corporation. |
|
|
|
The Code of Conduct does not prohibit continuing to include names, email |
|
addresses, and associated comments in mailing list messages, kernel |
|
change log messages, or code comments. |
|
|
|
Interaction in other forums is covered by whatever rules apply to said |
|
forums and is in general not covered by the Code of Conduct. Exceptions |
|
may be considered for extreme circumstances. |
|
|
|
Contributions submitted for the kernel should use appropriate language. |
|
Content that already exists predating the Code of Conduct will not be |
|
addressed now as a violation. Inappropriate language can be seen as a |
|
bug, though; such bugs will be fixed more quickly if any interested |
|
parties submit patches to that effect. Expressions that are currently |
|
part of the user/kernel API, or reflect terminology used in published |
|
standards or specifications, are not considered bugs. |
|
|
|
Enforcement |
|
----------- |
|
|
|
The address listed in the Code of Conduct goes to the Code of Conduct |
|
Committee. The exact members receiving these emails at any given time |
|
are listed at https://kernel.org/code-of-conduct.html. Members can not |
|
access reports made before they joined or after they have left the |
|
committee. |
|
|
|
The initial Code of Conduct Committee consists of volunteer members of |
|
the TAB, as well as a professional mediator acting as a neutral third |
|
party. The first task of the committee is to establish documented |
|
processes, which will be made public. |
|
|
|
Any member of the committee, including the mediator, can be contacted |
|
directly if a reporter does not wish to include the full committee in a |
|
complaint or concern. |
|
|
|
The Code of Conduct Committee reviews the cases according to the |
|
processes (see above) and consults with the TAB as needed and |
|
appropriate, for instance to request and receive information about the |
|
kernel community. |
|
|
|
Any decisions by the committee will be brought to the TAB, for |
|
implementation of enforcement with the relevant maintainers if needed. |
|
A decision by the Code of Conduct Committee can be overturned by the TAB |
|
by a two-thirds vote. |
|
|
|
At quarterly intervals, the Code of Conduct Committee and TAB will |
|
provide a report summarizing the anonymised reports that the Code of |
|
Conduct committee has received and their status, as well details of any |
|
overridden decisions including complete and identifiable voting details. |
|
|
|
We expect to establish a different process for Code of Conduct Committee |
|
staffing beyond the bootstrap period. This document will be updated |
|
with that information when this occurs.
|
|
|