[PATCH] SubmittingPatches: allow non-real name contributions

[PATCH] SubmittingPatches: allow non-real name contributions

[brian m. carlson]

Our submission guidelines require people to use their real name, but
this is not always suitable for various reasons.

For people who are transgender or non-binary and are transitioning or
who think they might want to transition, it can be a major obstacle and
cause major discomfort to require the use of their real name.  This is
made worse by the fact that Git provides no way to change names built
into history, so the use of a deadname is forever.  Our code of conduct
states that we "pledge to act and interact in ways that contribute to an
open, welcoming, diverse, inclusive, and healthy community," and
changing this policy is one way we can improve things for contributors.

In addition, there are some developers who are so widely known
pseudonymously that they have a Wikipedia page with their handle and no
real name.  It would seem silly to reject patches from people who are
known and respected in their open-source community just because they
don't wish to share a real name.

There are also other good reasons why people might operate
pseudonymously: because they or their family members are well known and
they wish to protect their privacy, because of current or past
harassment or retaliation or fear of that happening in the future, or
because of concerns about unwanted attention from government officials
or other authority figures.  As much as possible, we want to welcome
contributions from anyone who is willing to participate positively in
our community without having them worry about their safety or privacy.

In all of these cases, we should allow people to proceed using a
preferred name or pseudonymously if, in their best judgment, that's the
right thing to do.  State that it is common to use a real name but
explicitly mention that contributors who are not comfortable doing so or
prefer to operate pseudonymously or under a preferred name can proceed
otherwise.  Use "some form of your real name" since some current
contributors use shortened forms of their name or use initials, which
have always been considered acceptable.

Retain the prohibition on anonymous contributions that the Linux kernel
has to ensure that we have some line of provenance to a known (if
pseudonymous) author who might be able to respond to questions about it.

This helps guide people who would be fine using their real name but have
misconfigured `user.name` thinking it is intended to be a username or is
used for authentication (despite our documentation to the contrary), but
also allows for a variety of circumstances where the contributor would
feel more comfortable not doing so.

Additionally, retain the section header ID for ease of linking across
versions.

Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
---
I don't claim that this is the best possible wording and I'm open to
changing it.   The term "known identity" comes from Linux, but if we
need to clarify using different language or otherwise change any part of
this up, we can do so.

 Documentation/SubmittingPatches | 7 +++++--
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
index 958e3cc3d5..a4f4ca0205 100644
--- a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
+++ b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
@@ -408,8 +408,11 @@ your patch differs from project to project, so it may be different
 from that of the project you are accustomed to.
 
 [[real-name]]
-Also notice that a real name is used in the `Signed-off-by` trailer. Please
-don't hide your real name.
+Please use a known identity in the `Signed-off-by` trailer, since we
+unfortunately cannot accept anonymous contributions. It is common to use some
+form of your real name. We realize that some contributors are not comfortable
+doing so or prefer to contribute under a pseudonym or preferred name and we can
+accept your patch either way.
 
 [[commit-trailers]]
 If you like, you can put extra trailers at the end:

Re: [PATCH] SubmittingPatches: allow non-real name contributions

[Jacob Keller]

On Sun, Jul 6, 2025 at 9:30 AM brian m. carlson
<sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> wrote:
>
> Our submission guidelines require people to use their real name, but
> this is not always suitable for various reasons.
>
> For people who are transgender or non-binary and are transitioning or
> who think they might want to transition, it can be a major obstacle and
> cause major discomfort to require the use of their real name.  This is
> made worse by the fact that Git provides no way to change names built
> into history, so the use of a deadname is forever.  Our code of conduct
> states that we "pledge to act and interact in ways that contribute to an
> open, welcoming, diverse, inclusive, and healthy community," and
> changing this policy is one way we can improve things for contributors.
>
> In addition, there are some developers who are so widely known
> pseudonymously that they have a Wikipedia page with their handle and no
> real name.  It would seem silly to reject patches from people who are
> known and respected in their open-source community just because they
> don't wish to share a real name.
>
> There are also other good reasons why people might operate
> pseudonymously: because they or their family members are well known and
> they wish to protect their privacy, because of current or past
> harassment or retaliation or fear of that happening in the future, or
> because of concerns about unwanted attention from government officials
> or other authority figures.  As much as possible, we want to welcome
> contributions from anyone who is willing to participate positively in
> our community without having them worry about their safety or privacy.
>
> In all of these cases, we should allow people to proceed using a
> preferred name or pseudonymously if, in their best judgment, that's the
> right thing to do.  State that it is common to use a real name but
> explicitly mention that contributors who are not comfortable doing so or
> prefer to operate pseudonymously or under a preferred name can proceed
> otherwise.  Use "some form of your real name" since some current
> contributors use shortened forms of their name or use initials, which
> have always been considered acceptable.
>
> Retain the prohibition on anonymous contributions that the Linux kernel
> has to ensure that we have some line of provenance to a known (if
> pseudonymous) author who might be able to respond to questions about it.
>
> This helps guide people who would be fine using their real name but have
> misconfigured `user.name` thinking it is intended to be a username or is
> used for authentication (despite our documentation to the contrary), but
> also allows for a variety of circumstances where the contributor would
> feel more comfortable not doing so.
>
> Additionally, retain the section header ID for ease of linking across
> versions.
>
> Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
> ---

I wholeheartedly agree with this suggested change.

Reviewed-by: Jacob Keller <jacob.keller@gmail.com>

Re: [PATCH] SubmittingPatches: allow non-real name contributions

[Junio C Hamano]

"brian m. carlson" <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> writes:

> Our submission guidelines require people to use their real name, but
> this is not always suitable for various reasons.
> ...

Another thing to consider, which may matter even more in the context
of SubmittingPatches, is if it is necessary.  If there is a
requirement, which may or may not be the "real name", that is
essential to keep DCO enforceable, we will not be able to drop such
an essential requirement, even if it is "not suitable" for some
people.  We would have to rather ask these people refrain from
contributing.

But if a requirment we currently have, like "real name", is not
necessary and if "known identity" is sufficient, then by all means,
let's make sure we can loosen the wording to make it "suitable" to
more people.

> In addition, there are some developers who are so widely known
> pseudonymously that they have a Wikipedia page with their handle and no
> real name.  It would seem silly to reject patches from people who are
> known and respected in their open-source community just because they
> don't wish to share a real name.

Yup.

> Retain the prohibition on anonymous contributions that the Linux kernel
> has to ensure that we have some line of provenance to a known (if
> pseudonymous) author who might be able to respond to questions about it.

Where is this reference to "Linux kernel" come from?  Shouldn't we
name our own project and adopt this new language for our own rules?

And yes, total anonymity goes directly against provenance traceability,
so it is not a passive "unfortunately we cannot accept" with regret;
it is a lot more active and positive "we must not accept an
anonymous contributions."

> I don't claim that this is the best possible wording and I'm open to
> changing it.   The term "known identity" comes from Linux, but if we
> need to clarify using different language or otherwise change any part of
> this up, we can do so.

Thanks for writing this.

>  [[real-name]]
> -Also notice that a real name is used in the `Signed-off-by` trailer. Please
> -don't hide your real name.
> +Please use a known identity in the `Signed-off-by` trailer, since we
> +unfortunately cannot accept anonymous contributions. It is common to use some

Drop "unfortunately".  We will not accept anonymous contributions.
It is not like we would wish to if we can but somebody else tells us
not to.

> +form of your real name. We realize that some contributors are not comfortable
> +doing so or prefer to contribute under a pseudonym or preferred name and we can
> +accept your patch either way.

Thanks.

Re: [PATCH] SubmittingPatches: allow non-real name contributions

[Ayush Chandekar]

Hi,

On 7 July 2025 06:41:02 GMT+05:30, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>"brian m. carlson" <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> writes:
>
>> Our submission guidelines require people to use their real name, but
>> this is not always suitable for various reasons.
>> ...
>
>Another thing to consider, which may matter even more in the context
>of SubmittingPatches, is if it is necessary.  If there is a
>requirement, which may or may not be the "real name", that is
>essential to keep DCO enforceable, we will not be able to drop such
>an essential requirement, even if it is "not suitable" for some
>people.  We would have to rather ask these people refrain from
>contributing.
>
>But if a requirment we currently have, like "real name", is not
>necessary and if "known identity" is sufficient, then by all means,
>let's make sure we can loosen the wording to make it "suitable" to
>more people.
>
>> In addition, there are some developers who are so widely known
>> pseudonymously that they have a Wikipedia page with their handle and no
>> real name.  It would seem silly to reject patches from people who are
>> known and respected in their open-source community just because they
>> don't wish to share a real name.
>
>Yup.
>
>> Retain the prohibition on anonymous contributions that the Linux kernel
>> has to ensure that we have some line of provenance to a known (if
>> pseudonymous) author who might be able to respond to questions about it.
>
>Where is this reference to "Linux kernel" come from?  Shouldn't we
>name our own project and adopt this new language for our own rules?
>
>And yes, total anonymity goes directly against provenance traceability,
>so it is not a passive "unfortunately we cannot accept" with regret;
>it is a lot more active and positive "we must not accept an
>anonymous contributions."
>

I want to know how we deal with anonymous contributions. Let's suppose someone creates an internet persona claiming that foo bar is their real name or an alias. They make some contribution and then abandon this persona. So, isn't this effectively an anonymous contribution?

>> I don't claim that this is the best possible wording and I'm open to
>> changing it.   The term "known identity" comes from Linux, but if we
>> need to clarify using different language or otherwise change any part of
>> this up, we can do so.
>
>Thanks for writing this.
>
>>  [[real-name]]
>> -Also notice that a real name is used in the `Signed-off-by` trailer. Please
>> -don't hide your real name.
>> +Please use a known identity in the `Signed-off-by` trailer, since we
>> +unfortunately cannot accept anonymous contributions. It is common to use some
>
>Drop "unfortunately".  We will not accept anonymous contributions.
>It is not like we would wish to if we can but somebody else tells us
>not to.
>
>> +form of your real name. We realize that some contributors are not comfortable
>> +doing so or prefer to contribute under a pseudonym or preferred name and we can
>> +accept your patch either way.
>
>Thanks.
>

Thanks.

Ayush

Re: [PATCH] SubmittingPatches: allow non-real name contributions

[Theodore Ts'o]

On Mon, Jul 07, 2025 at 07:27:48AM +0530, Ayush Chandekar wrote:
> >
> >Where is this reference to "Linux kernel" come from?  Shouldn't we
> >name our own project and adopt this new language for our own rules?
> >
> >And yes, total anonymity goes directly against provenance traceability,
> >so it is not a passive "unfortunately we cannot accept" with regret;
> >it is a lot more active and positive "we must not accept an
> >anonymous contributions."

Well, the SubmittingPatches originally came from the Linux Kernel, and
the policies and procedures that were adopted by the Linux Kernel
comes from a lot of hard won experience which the git project might
want to consider.  In addition, it was also informed with a lot of
advice and review of lawyers employed or contracted by the Linux
Foundation.  (The Developers of Certification Origin had quite a lot
of input for lawyers to make sure it would work in multiple legal
jourisdictions.)

So for example, it's not just about copyright concerns vis-a-vis
anonymous contributions.  It's also about OFAC Sanctions[1], since an
anonymous contributor might be someone working for a Sanctioned Entity
trying to bypass them.

[1] https://www.linuxfoundation.org/blog/navigating-global-regulations-and-open-source-us-ofac-sanctions

(And note, it's not just about the US Sanctions; there are very
similar, and in some cases, stricter sanctions promulgated by other
countries, including Japan, Switzerland, Australia, the United
Kingdom, the European Union --- and this is not a comprehesive list.
For better or for worse, the Russian Federation has managed to annoy
quite a large number of countries, and many of us either live in, or
work for companies domiciled in one of them.  If you work for a
company which is a member of te Linux Foundation, Mike Dolan or some
other LF lawyer should have reached out to your General Counsel; so
talk to your legal department.)

Cheers,

						- Ted

Re: [PATCH] SubmittingPatches: allow non-real name contributions

[Junio C Hamano]

"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu> writes:

> ... advice and review of lawyers employed or contracted by the Linux
> Foundation.  (The Developers of Certification Origin had quite a lot
> of input for lawyers to make sure it would work in multiple legal
> jourisdictions.)
>
> So for example, it's not just about copyright concerns vis-a-vis
> anonymous contributions.  It's also about OFAC Sanctions[1], since an
> anonymous contributor might be someone working for a Sanctioned Entity
> trying to bypass them.

These are excellent points.  All the more reasons why not just we
cannot but we do not want to take anonymous contributions to protect
ourselves.

Thanks.

Re: [PATCH] SubmittingPatches: allow non-real name contributions

[Jacob Keller]

On Sun, Jul 6, 2025 at 7:01 PM Ayush Chandekar <ayu.chandekar@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I want to know how we deal with anonymous contributions. Let's suppose someone creates an internet persona claiming that foo bar is their real name or an alias. They make some contribution and then abandon this persona. So, isn't this effectively an anonymous contribution?
>

I think this is an unrelated issue of whether or not we accept
nicknames or names other than your "legal" name. It is always possible
someone is lying, whether we do or don't change that policy.

The exact decision for any such given change is likely context
dependent. If a change were made in bad faith and we discover it, then
it would be matter of excising the change. If it were merely a change
someone submitted in good faith and we can no longer contact them, it
might make sense in cases to find a new owner or maintainer, unless we
have strong reason to believe that we do not have a valid DCO, in
which case it might also require removal.

Re: [PATCH] SubmittingPatches: allow non-real name contributions

[Phillip Wood]

Hi brian

On 06/07/2025 17:30, brian m. carlson wrote:
> Our submission guidelines require people to use their real name, but
> this is not always suitable for various reasons.
> 
> For people who are transgender or non-binary and are transitioning or
> who think they might want to transition, it can be a major obstacle and
> cause major discomfort to require the use of their real name.  This is
> made worse by the fact that Git provides no way to change names built
> into history, so the use of a deadname is forever.  Our code of conduct
> states that we "pledge to act and interact in ways that contribute to an
> open, welcoming, diverse, inclusive, and healthy community," and
> changing this policy is one way we can improve things for contributors.
> 
> In addition, there are some developers who are so widely known
> pseudonymously that they have a Wikipedia page with their handle and no
> real name.  It would seem silly to reject patches from people who are
> known and respected in their open-source community just because they
> don't wish to share a real name.
> 
> There are also other good reasons why people might operate
> pseudonymously: because they or their family members are well known and
> they wish to protect their privacy, because of current or past
> harassment or retaliation or fear of that happening in the future, or
> because of concerns about unwanted attention from government officials
> or other authority figures.  As much as possible, we want to welcome
> contributions from anyone who is willing to participate positively in
> our community without having them worry about their safety or privacy.

These are all good reasons why someone might not want to contribute 
under their real name and I agree we should accommodate that if we can. 
I do think though that we should run this change past an license 
enforcement expert at Conservancy to check that it does not materially 
alter our ability to enforce the license. Assuming Conservancy are happy 
then I think this change is a good idea.

Thanks

Phillip

> In all of these cases, we should allow people to proceed using a
> preferred name or pseudonymously if, in their best judgment, that's the
> right thing to do.  State that it is common to use a real name but
> explicitly mention that contributors who are not comfortable doing so or
> prefer to operate pseudonymously or under a preferred name can proceed
> otherwise.  Use "some form of your real name" since some current
> contributors use shortened forms of their name or use initials, which
> have always been considered acceptable.


> Retain the prohibition on anonymous contributions that the Linux kernel
> has to ensure that we have some line of provenance to a known (if
> pseudonymous) author who might be able to respond to questions about it.
> 
> This helps guide people who would be fine using their real name but have
> misconfigured `user.name` thinking it is intended to be a username or is
> used for authentication (despite our documentation to the contrary), but
> also allows for a variety of circumstances where the contributor would
> feel more comfortable not doing so.
> 
> Additionally, retain the section header ID for ease of linking across
> versions.
> 
> Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
> ---
> I don't claim that this is the best possible wording and I'm open to
> changing it.   The term "known identity" comes from Linux, but if we
> need to clarify using different language or otherwise change any part of
> this up, we can do so.
> 
>   Documentation/SubmittingPatches | 7 +++++--
>   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
> index 958e3cc3d5..a4f4ca0205 100644
> --- a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
> +++ b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
> @@ -408,8 +408,11 @@ your patch differs from project to project, so it may be different
>   from that of the project you are accustomed to.
>   
>   [[real-name]]
> -Also notice that a real name is used in the `Signed-off-by` trailer. Please
> -don't hide your real name.
> +Please use a known identity in the `Signed-off-by` trailer, since we
> +unfortunately cannot accept anonymous contributions. It is common to use some
> +form of your real name. We realize that some contributors are not comfortable
> +doing so or prefer to contribute under a pseudonym or preferred name and we can
> +accept your patch either way.
>   
>   [[commit-trailers]]
>   If you like, you can put extra trailers at the end:
> 

Re: [PATCH] SubmittingPatches: allow non-real name contributions

[Jeff King]

On Sun, Jul 06, 2025 at 04:30:09PM +0000, brian m. carlson wrote:

> Our submission guidelines require people to use their real name, but
> this is not always suitable for various reasons.
> [...lots of reasons...]

I certainly don't disagree with any of those, though IMHO it is not even
our business why somebody would not want to disclose their real name.
What is much more interesting to me from the project side is this part:

> Retain the prohibition on anonymous contributions that the Linux kernel
> has to ensure that we have some line of provenance to a known (if
> pseudonymous) author who might be able to respond to questions about it.

I.e., why are we sure that it is OK for us to loosen this requirement
(without jeopardizing the legal status of contributions). And I think
the answer is along the lines of "the kernel did it, and they checked
with lawyers, so we can piggy-back on that work". But it would be nice
if we could cite that source, and maybe even lift some of their
language.

Looks like the kernel commit here:

  https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=d4563201f33a022fc0353033d9dfeb1606a88330

cites CNCF here:

  https://github.com/cncf/foundation/blob/659fd32c86dc/dco-guidelines.md

I don't know if there's any public discussion or statement from the
Linux Foundation or other legal folks on the kernel's wording. So there
might not be anything better to cite. And possibly we could run it past
Conservancy's counsel. I'll leave that up to PLC folks to decide on.

I kind of like the CNCF wording, which seems clear (though naturally,
IANAL).

Regardless, thanks for keeping this moving forward.

-Peff

Re: [PATCH] SubmittingPatches: allow non-real name contributions

[Martin Ågren]

On Mon, 7 Jul 2025 at 22:42, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jul 06, 2025 at 04:30:09PM +0000, brian m. carlson wrote:
>
> I.e., why are we sure that it is OK for us to loosen this requirement
> (without jeopardizing the legal status of contributions). And I think
> the answer is along the lines of "the kernel did it, and they checked
> with lawyers, so we can piggy-back on that work". But it would be nice
> if we could cite that source, and maybe even lift some of their
> language.
>
> Looks like the kernel commit here:
>
>   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=d4563201f33a022fc0353033d9dfeb1606a88330
>
> cites CNCF here:
>
>   https://github.com/cncf/foundation/blob/659fd32c86dc/dco-guidelines.md
>
> I don't know if there's any public discussion or statement from the
> Linux Foundation or other legal folks on the kernel's wording.

The commit is "Acked-by: Michael Dolan <mdolan@linuxfoundation.org>",
which seems to be a lawyer at LF, e.g., as per Ted's post elsewhere in
this thread. So that could be seen as some kind of statement.

> So there
> might not be anything better to cite. And possibly we could run it past
> Conservancy's counsel. I'll leave that up to PLC folks to decide on.

Martin

Re: [PATCH] SubmittingPatches: allow non-real name contributions

[Jeff King]

On Tue, Jul 08, 2025 at 09:10:44AM +0200, Martin Ågren wrote:

> > I.e., why are we sure that it is OK for us to loosen this requirement
> > (without jeopardizing the legal status of contributions). And I think
> > the answer is along the lines of "the kernel did it, and they checked
> > with lawyers, so we can piggy-back on that work". But it would be nice
> > if we could cite that source, and maybe even lift some of their
> > language.
> >
> > Looks like the kernel commit here:
> >
> >   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=d4563201f33a022fc0353033d9dfeb1606a88330
> >
> > cites CNCF here:
> >
> >   https://github.com/cncf/foundation/blob/659fd32c86dc/dco-guidelines.md
> >
> > I don't know if there's any public discussion or statement from the
> > Linux Foundation or other legal folks on the kernel's wording.
> 
> The commit is "Acked-by: Michael Dolan <mdolan@linuxfoundation.org>",
> which seems to be a lawyer at LF, e.g., as per Ted's post elsewhere in
> this thread. So that could be seen as some kind of statement.

Yeah, I agree (and didn't know that before; thanks for mentioning). I
think mostly I was just hoping that some of this reasoning and these
pointers would make it into the commit message.

The content of the patch looked OK to me, though I do still like the
CNCF wording a bit better.

-Peff

Re: [PATCH] SubmittingPatches: allow non-real name contributions

[brian m. carlson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2393 bytes --]

On 2025-07-08 at 22:51:34, Jeff King wrote:
> Yeah, I agree (and didn't know that before; thanks for mentioning). I
> think mostly I was just hoping that some of this reasoning and these
> pointers would make it into the commit message.
> 
> The content of the patch looked OK to me, though I do still like the
> CNCF wording a bit better.

In case it isn't clear, I'll be sending a v2, probably this weekend with
more of this information and some updated wording.

I don't love the CNCF wording because I feel it's too ambiguously
worded.  What is the "community"?  The open-source community?  My
neighbourhood?  My friend group?  Can a real name be a username or
handle that's distinct and unambiguous?  What about communities where
people share the same name?  (Debian has, or at least had, two
contributors who both have the exact same full legal name and can
therefore only be distinguished by handle.)

I also think redefining "real name" in that way is misleading and leads
to confusion that might put people off, especially those that are not
native English speakers.  I know it's common for lawyers to redefine
language to mean something very precise but different from the language
that ordinary humans use[0], but that's ultimately dishonest and tends
to deceive and we shouldn't do it.  Most people take the phrase "real
name" to mean something equivalent to "legal name", so we should use
language to describe the requirement that doesn't confuse or mislead
people when it's used without further context (such as in a social media
post).

By contrast, we suggest that `user.name` "conventionally refer to some
form of a personal name".  That doesn't work here because I did intend
for us to allow handles or usernames, but Wikipedia describes it as "the
set of names by which an individual person or animal is known" and, due
to the use of the passive voice (an intentional choice, I'm sure) is
specifically ambiguous and allows lots of allowance for personal
circumstances.

I'll take some inspiration from the CNCF post and rephrase to make it
more approachable in v2.

[0] For instance, one time where I was told that my laptop's removable
battery was an "accessory" and was therefore not covered under warranty,
despite the fact that it was required for the machine to boot.
-- 
brian m. carlson (they/them)
Toronto, Ontario, CA

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 262 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] SubmittingPatches: allow non-real name contributions

[Jeff King]

On Wed, Jul 09, 2025 at 10:42:58PM +0000, brian m. carlson wrote:

> On 2025-07-08 at 22:51:34, Jeff King wrote:
> > Yeah, I agree (and didn't know that before; thanks for mentioning). I
> > think mostly I was just hoping that some of this reasoning and these
> > pointers would make it into the commit message.
> > 
> > The content of the patch looked OK to me, though I do still like the
> > CNCF wording a bit better.
> 
> In case it isn't clear, I'll be sending a v2, probably this weekend with
> more of this information and some updated wording.
> 
> I don't love the CNCF wording because I feel it's too ambiguously
> worded.  What is the "community"?  The open-source community?  My
> neighbourhood?  My friend group?  Can a real name be a username or
> handle that's distinct and unambiguous?  What about communities where
> people share the same name?  (Debian has, or at least had, two
> contributors who both have the exact same full legal name and can
> therefore only be distinguished by handle.)
> 
> I also think redefining "real name" in that way is misleading and leads
> to confusion that might put people off, especially those that are not
> native English speakers.  I know it's common for lawyers to redefine
> language to mean something very precise but different from the language
> that ordinary humans use[0], but that's ultimately dishonest and tends
> to deceive and we shouldn't do it.  Most people take the phrase "real
> name" to mean something equivalent to "legal name", so we should use
> language to describe the requirement that doesn't confuse or mislead
> people when it's used without further context (such as in a social media
> post).

Fair points. I think what I liked about it is that it emphasized the
purpose of the policy:

  The key concern is that your identification is sufficient enough to
  contact you if an issue were to arise in the future about your
  contribution.

I also liked the sentence before:

  Your real name is the name you convey to people in the community for
  them to use to identify you as you.

but I agree that "community" is vague there. I think it mostly means
"the development community", but I agree that we could perhaps sidestep
the whole issue by just saying we need some way to be able to identify
and get in touch with you.

> I'll take some inspiration from the CNCF post and rephrase to make it
> more approachable in v2.

Great, thank you.

-Peff

Re: [PATCH] SubmittingPatches: allow non-real name contributions

[Junio C Hamano]

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

> On Wed, Jul 09, 2025 at 10:42:58PM +0000, brian m. carlson wrote:
>
>> On 2025-07-08 at 22:51:34, Jeff King wrote:
>> > Yeah, I agree (and didn't know that before; thanks for mentioning). I
>> > think mostly I was just hoping that some of this reasoning and these
>> > pointers would make it into the commit message.
>> > 
>> > The content of the patch looked OK to me, though I do still like the
>> > CNCF wording a bit better.
>> 
>> In case it isn't clear, I'll be sending a v2, probably this weekend with
>> more of this information and some updated wording.
>> 
>> I don't love the CNCF wording because I feel it's too ambiguously
>> worded.  What is the "community"?  The open-source community?  My
>> neighbourhood?  My friend group?  Can a real name be a username or
>> handle that's distinct and unambiguous?  What about communities where
>> people share the same name?  (Debian has, or at least had, two
>> contributors who both have the exact same full legal name and can
>> therefore only be distinguished by handle.)
>> 
>> I also think redefining "real name" in that way is misleading and leads
>> to confusion that might put people off, especially those that are not
>> native English speakers.  I know it's common for lawyers to redefine
>> language to mean something very precise but different from the language
>> that ordinary humans use[0], but that's ultimately dishonest and tends
>> to deceive and we shouldn't do it.  Most people take the phrase "real
>> name" to mean something equivalent to "legal name", so we should use
>> language to describe the requirement that doesn't confuse or mislead
>> people when it's used without further context (such as in a social media
>> post).
>
> Fair points. I think what I liked about it is that it emphasized the
> purpose of the policy:
>
>   The key concern is that your identification is sufficient enough to
>   contact you if an issue were to arise in the future about your
>   contribution.
>
> I also liked the sentence before:
>
>   Your real name is the name you convey to people in the community for
>   them to use to identify you as you.
>
> but I agree that "community" is vague there. I think it mostly means
> "the development community", but I agree that we could perhaps sidestep
> the whole issue by just saying we need some way to be able to identify
> and get in touch with you.
>
>> I'll take some inspiration from the CNCF post and rephrase to make it
>> more approachable in v2.
>
> Great, thank you.

Sounds good.  Thanks, both of you.

[PATCH v2] SubmittingPatches: allow non-real name contributions

[brian m. carlson]

Our submission guidelines require people to use their real name, but
this is not always suitable for various reasons.

For people who are transgender or non-binary and are transitioning or
who think they might want to transition, it can be a major obstacle and
cause major discomfort to require the use of their real name.  This is
made worse by the fact that Git provides no way to change names built
into history, so the use of a deadname is forever.  Our code of conduct
states that we "pledge to act and interact in ways that contribute to an
open, welcoming, diverse, inclusive, and healthy community," and
changing this policy is one way we can improve things for contributors.

In addition, there are some developers who are so widely known
pseudonymously that they have a Wikipedia page with their handle and no
real name.  It would seem silly to reject patches from people who are
known and respected in their open-source community just because they
don't wish to share a real name.

There are also other good reasons why people might operate
pseudonymously: because they or their family members are well known and
they wish to protect their privacy, because of current or past
harassment or retaliation or fear of that happening in the future, or
because of concerns about unwanted attention from government officials
or other authority figures.  As much as possible, we want to welcome
contributions from anyone who is willing to participate positively in
our community without having them worry about their safety or privacy.

In all of these cases, we should allow people to proceed using a
preferred name or pseudonymously if, in their best judgment, that's the
right thing to do.  State that it is common to use a real name but
explicitly mention that contributors who are not comfortable doing so or
prefer to operate pseudonymously or under a preferred name can proceed
otherwise, provided the name is distinctive, identifying, and not
misleading.  For instance, using U+2060 (WORD JOINER) as one's ID would
likely be distinctive but not identifying, since most people would have
trouble reading it due to its zero-width nature.

We prohibit identities which are misleading, since our goal is to create
a community which works together with a common goal, and misleading or
deceiving others is not conducive to good community or compatible with
our code of conduct, nor is it compatible with making a legal assertion
about the provenance of one's code.

Explicitly prohibit anonymous contributions to ensure that we have some
line of provenance to a known (if pseudonymous) author who might be able
to respond to questions about it.  Explain that this is the reason we
have this policy to help contributors understand the rationale better.

Use "some form of your real name" since some current contributors use
shortened forms of their name or use initials, which have always been
considered acceptable.  This helps guide people who would be fine using
their real name but have misconfigured `user.name` thinking it is
intended to be a username or is used for authentication (despite our
documentation to the contrary), but also allows for a variety of
circumstances where the contributor would feel more comfortable not
doing so.

Note that this policy is the same as that of the Linux kernel[0] and the
CNCF[1], as well as many smaller projects.  The Linux kernel patch was
Acked-by one of the Linux Foundation's lawyers, Michael Dolan, so it
appears these changes have had legal review.

Additionally, retain the section header ID for ease of linking across
versions.

[0] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=d4563201f33a022fc0353033d9dfeb1606a88330
[1] https://github.com/cncf/foundation/blob/659fd32c86dc/dco-guidelines.md

Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
---
 Documentation/SubmittingPatches | 11 +++++++++--
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
index 958e3cc3d5..86ca7f6a78 100644
--- a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
+++ b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
@@ -408,8 +408,15 @@ your patch differs from project to project, so it may be different
 from that of the project you are accustomed to.
 
 [[real-name]]
-Also notice that a real name is used in the `Signed-off-by` trailer. Please
-don't hide your real name.
+Please use a known identity in the `Signed-off-by` trailer, since we cannot
+accept anonymous contributions. It is common, but not required, to use some form
+of your real name. We realize that some contributors are not comfortable doing
+so or prefer to contribute under a pseudonym or preferred name and we can accept
+your patch either way, as long as the name and email you use are distinctive,
+identifying, and not misleading.
+
+The goal of this policy is to allow us to have sufficient information to contact
+you if questions arise about your contribution.
 
 [[commit-trailers]]
 If you like, you can put extra trailers at the end:

Re: [PATCH v2] SubmittingPatches: allow non-real name contributions

[Jeff King]

On Wed, Jul 16, 2025 at 12:25:23AM +0000, brian m. carlson wrote:

> -Also notice that a real name is used in the `Signed-off-by` trailer. Please
> -don't hide your real name.
> +Please use a known identity in the `Signed-off-by` trailer, since we cannot
> +accept anonymous contributions. It is common, but not required, to use some form
> +of your real name. We realize that some contributors are not comfortable doing
> +so or prefer to contribute under a pseudonym or preferred name and we can accept
> +your patch either way, as long as the name and email you use are distinctive,
> +identifying, and not misleading.
> +
> +The goal of this policy is to allow us to have sufficient information to contact
> +you if questions arise about your contribution.

Thanks for updating. I think this reads very well, and you included all
of the citations I asked for in the commit message. So this looks good
to me!

-Peff

Re: [PATCH v2] SubmittingPatches: allow non-real name contributions

[Patrick Steinhardt]

On Wed, Jul 16, 2025 at 12:44:57AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2025 at 12:25:23AM +0000, brian m. carlson wrote:
> 
> > -Also notice that a real name is used in the `Signed-off-by` trailer. Please
> > -don't hide your real name.
> > +Please use a known identity in the `Signed-off-by` trailer, since we cannot
> > +accept anonymous contributions. It is common, but not required, to use some form
> > +of your real name. We realize that some contributors are not comfortable doing
> > +so or prefer to contribute under a pseudonym or preferred name and we can accept
> > +your patch either way, as long as the name and email you use are distinctive,
> > +identifying, and not misleading.
> > +
> > +The goal of this policy is to allow us to have sufficient information to contact
> > +you if questions arise about your contribution.
> 
> Thanks for updating. I think this reads very well, and you included all
> of the citations I asked for in the commit message. So this looks good
> to me!

Seconded, I'm also very much supportive of this change and like this
version. Thanks!

Patrick

Re: [PATCH v2] SubmittingPatches: allow non-real name contributions

[Junio C Hamano]

"brian m. carlson" <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> writes:

> Note that this policy is the same as that of the Linux kernel[0] and the
> CNCF[1], as well as many smaller projects.  The Linux kernel patch was
> Acked-by one of the Linux Foundation's lawyers, Michael Dolan, so it
> appears these changes have had legal review.

I understand what this wants to say, but found it a tiny bit
misleading.  The kernel and CNCF do not agree with the exact
wording, and this one copies from neither, so "policy is the same"
is really "policy is in the same in spirit, even though the text to
spell out that policy used by all these three projects differ".

Which is not a bad thing at all, but was a bit misleading.

> Additionally, retain the section header ID for ease of linking across
> versions.
>
> [0] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=d4563201f33a022fc0353033d9dfeb1606a88330
> [1] https://github.com/cncf/foundation/blob/659fd32c86dc/dco-guidelines.md
>
> Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
> ---
>  Documentation/SubmittingPatches | 11 +++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

The text with the patch applied is great.  Let's merge it down
quickly to 'master'.

Thanks.

> diff --git a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
> index 958e3cc3d5..86ca7f6a78 100644
> --- a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
> +++ b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
> @@ -408,8 +408,15 @@ your patch differs from project to project, so it may be different
>  from that of the project you are accustomed to.
>  
>  [[real-name]]
> -Also notice that a real name is used in the `Signed-off-by` trailer. Please
> -don't hide your real name.
> +Please use a known identity in the `Signed-off-by` trailer, since we cannot
> +accept anonymous contributions. It is common, but not required, to use some form
> +of your real name. We realize that some contributors are not comfortable doing
> +so or prefer to contribute under a pseudonym or preferred name and we can accept
> +your patch either way, as long as the name and email you use are distinctive,
> +identifying, and not misleading.
> +
> +The goal of this policy is to allow us to have sufficient information to contact
> +you if questions arise about your contribution.
>  
>  [[commit-trailers]]
>  If you like, you can put extra trailers at the end: