Re: When we detect that a 16550 was in fact part of a NatSemi SuperIO chip

[Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>]

> So, regretfully, this leaves me with the only option but to ignore
> David via all forms of communication until the reason for deference
> is resolved - namely the completion of OSDLs investigation.

Would a few people mind growing up ?

Let me make the obvious little point that nobody has it seems bothered
to notice. Dwmw2 asked you to not mangle his headers. Whatever the data
protection legislation covers is open to some debate but he has clearly
giving you permission to include them unmangled. End of debate both in
DP law and by estoppel.

There is also a really simple and trivial way to deal with data
protection questions in this case with complete clarity, without
tantrums and without an army of lawyers - that is to follow the whole
point and goal of such systems.

Take the existing OSDL statement which must be attached to all
submissions by reference or directly and update it to include

"A public record of contributions is kept which includes the name and
email address of each contributor. By contributing to the kernel project
I accept that my email address provided will be part of that public
record."

and the problem goes away. 

I think this change is worth making anyway, perceived privacy is an ever
growing issue of importance in our surveillance and database society
worldwide.

Alan