diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/process/code-of-conduct-interpretation.rst | 153 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/process/index.rst | 1 |
2 files changed, 154 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/process/code-of-conduct-interpretation.rst b/Documentation/process/code-of-conduct-interpretation.rst new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..b14441711f7b --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/process/code-of-conduct-interpretation.rst @@ -0,0 +1,153 @@ +Linux Kernel Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct Interpretation +================================================================ + +The Contributor Covenant 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 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 <mishi@linux.com>. + +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 <URL>. 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 Technical Advisory Board (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. diff --git a/Documentation/process/index.rst b/Documentation/process/index.rst index 9ae3e317bddf..42691e2880eb 100644 --- a/Documentation/process/index.rst +++ b/Documentation/process/index.rst @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@ Below are the essential guides that every developer should read. howto code-of-conduct + code-of-conduct-interpretation development-process submitting-patches coding-style |