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=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 022ECECE564 for ; Wed, 19 Sep 2018 14:18:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2DCB2150B for ; Wed, 19 Sep 2018 14:18:16 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org B2DCB2150B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net 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 S1732260AbeIST4V (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Sep 2018 15:56:21 -0400 Received: from ms.lwn.net ([45.79.88.28]:58738 "EHLO ms.lwn.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1731815AbeIST4V (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Sep 2018 15:56:21 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ms.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 53E512C9; Wed, 19 Sep 2018 14:18:14 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2018 08:18:12 -0600 From: Jonathan Corbet To: Edward Cree Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Code of Conduct: Let's revamp it. Message-ID: <20180919081812.020f19e3@lwn.net> In-Reply-To: References: Organization: LWN.net X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.16.0 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 19 Sep 2018 07:00:26 +0100 Edward Cree wrote: > By placing a corporate body (the LF) in >  the position of arbiter, an avenue is opened for commercial pressure to be >  applied; and the legalistic phrasing of the Code practically invites > rules- >  lawyering whereby the most abusive may twist it into a weapon to further >  their abuse. I'd like to address just this part, speaking only for myself. The LF is not in the position of arbitrating anything here. The body charged with that is the LF Technical Advisory Board, which is a different thing. It's currently this motley crowd: https://www.linuxfoundation.org/about/technical-advisory-board/ I think most of us would agree that those folks lack the desire to go around harassing developers, and they lack the time to do so in any case. The TAB is chosen by a vote of developers at the kernel summit; that will happen in Vancouver in November. jon