Loading...
1.. _code_of_conduct_interpretation:
2
3Linux Kernel Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct Interpretation
4================================================================
5
6The :ref:`code_of_conduct` is a general document meant to
7provide a set of rules for almost any open source community. Every
8open-source community is unique and the Linux kernel is no exception.
9Because of this, this document describes how we in the Linux kernel
10community will interpret it. We also do not expect this interpretation
11to be static over time, and will adjust it as needed.
12
13The Linux kernel development effort is a very personal process compared
14to "traditional" ways of developing software. Your contributions and
15ideas behind them will be carefully reviewed, often resulting in
16critique and criticism. The review will almost always require
17improvements before the material can be included in the
18kernel. Know that this happens because everyone involved wants to see
19the best possible solution for the overall success of Linux. This
20development process has been proven to create the most robust operating
21system kernel ever, and we do not want to do anything to cause the
22quality of submission and eventual result to ever decrease.
23
24Maintainers
25-----------
26
27The Code of Conduct uses the term "maintainers" numerous times. In the
28kernel community, a "maintainer" is anyone who is responsible for a
29subsystem, driver, or file, and is listed in the MAINTAINERS file in the
30kernel source tree.
31
32Responsibilities
33----------------
34
35The Code of Conduct mentions rights and responsibilities for
36maintainers, and this needs some further clarifications.
37
38First and foremost, it is a reasonable expectation to have maintainers
39lead by example.
40
41That being said, our community is vast and broad, and there is no new
42requirement for maintainers to unilaterally handle how other people
43behave in the parts of the community where they are active. That
44responsibility is upon all of us, and ultimately the Code of Conduct
45documents final escalation paths in case of unresolved concerns
46regarding conduct issues.
47
48Maintainers should be willing to help when problems occur, and work with
49others in the community when needed. Do not be afraid to reach out to
50the Technical Advisory Board (TAB) or other maintainers if you're
51uncertain how to handle situations that come up. It will not be
52considered a violation report unless you want it to be. If you are
53uncertain about approaching the TAB or any other maintainers, please
54reach out to our conflict mediator, Mishi Choudhary <mishi@linux.com>.
55
56In the end, "be kind to each other" is really what the end goal is for
57everybody. We know everyone is human and we all fail at times, but the
58primary goal for all of us should be to work toward amicable resolutions
59of problems. Enforcement of the code of conduct will only be a last
60resort option.
61
62Our goal of creating a robust and technically advanced operating system
63and the technical complexity involved naturally require expertise and
64decision-making.
65
66The required expertise varies depending on the area of contribution. It
67is determined mainly by context and technical complexity and only
68secondary by the expectations of contributors and maintainers.
69
70Both the expertise expectations and decision-making are subject to
71discussion, but at the very end there is a basic necessity to be able to
72make decisions in order to make progress. This prerogative is in the
73hands of maintainers and project's leadership and is expected to be used
74in good faith.
75
76As a consequence, setting expertise expectations, making decisions and
77rejecting unsuitable contributions are not viewed as a violation of the
78Code of Conduct.
79
80While maintainers are in general welcoming to newcomers, their capacity
81of helping contributors overcome the entry hurdles is limited, so they
82have to set priorities. This, also, is not to be seen as a violation of
83the Code of Conduct. The kernel community is aware of that and provides
84entry level programs in various forms like kernelnewbies.org.
85
86Scope
87-----
88
89The Linux kernel community primarily interacts on a set of public email
90lists distributed around a number of different servers controlled by a
91number of different companies or individuals. All of these lists are
92defined in the MAINTAINERS file in the kernel source tree. Any emails
93sent to those mailing lists are considered covered by the Code of
94Conduct.
95
96Developers who use the kernel.org bugzilla, and other subsystem bugzilla
97or bug tracking tools should follow the guidelines of the Code of
98Conduct. The Linux kernel community does not have an "official" project
99email address, or "official" social media address. Any activity
100performed using a kernel.org email account must follow the Code of
101Conduct as published for kernel.org, just as any individual using a
102corporate email account must follow the specific rules of that
103corporation.
104
105The Code of Conduct does not prohibit continuing to include names, email
106addresses, and associated comments in mailing list messages, kernel
107change log messages, or code comments.
108
109Interaction in other forums is covered by whatever rules apply to said
110forums and is in general not covered by the Code of Conduct. Exceptions
111may be considered for extreme circumstances.
112
113Contributions submitted for the kernel should use appropriate language.
114Content that already exists predating the Code of Conduct will not be
115addressed now as a violation. Inappropriate language can be seen as a
116bug, though; such bugs will be fixed more quickly if any interested
117parties submit patches to that effect. Expressions that are currently
118part of the user/kernel API, or reflect terminology used in published
119standards or specifications, are not considered bugs.
120
121Enforcement
122-----------
123
124The address listed in the Code of Conduct goes to the Code of Conduct
125Committee. The exact members receiving these emails at any given time
126are listed at https://kernel.org/code-of-conduct.html. Members can not
127access reports made before they joined or after they have left the
128committee.
129
130The initial Code of Conduct Committee consists of volunteer members of
131the TAB, as well as a professional mediator acting as a neutral third
132party. The first task of the committee is to establish documented
133processes, which will be made public.
134
135Any member of the committee, including the mediator, can be contacted
136directly if a reporter does not wish to include the full committee in a
137complaint or concern.
138
139The Code of Conduct Committee reviews the cases according to the
140processes (see above) and consults with the TAB as needed and
141appropriate, for instance to request and receive information about the
142kernel community.
143
144Any decisions by the committee will be brought to the TAB, for
145implementation of enforcement with the relevant maintainers if needed.
146A decision by the Code of Conduct Committee can be overturned by the TAB
147by a two-thirds vote.
148
149At quarterly intervals, the Code of Conduct Committee and TAB will
150provide a report summarizing the anonymised reports that the Code of
151Conduct committee has received and their status, as well details of any
152overridden decisions including complete and identifiable voting details.
153
154We expect to establish a different process for Code of Conduct Committee
155staffing beyond the bootstrap period. This document will be updated
156with that information when this occurs.
1.. _code_of_conduct_interpretation:
2
3Linux Kernel Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct Interpretation
4================================================================
5
6The :ref:`code_of_conduct` is a general document meant to
7provide a set of rules for almost any open source community. Every
8open-source community is unique and the Linux kernel is no exception.
9Because of this, this document describes how we in the Linux kernel
10community will interpret it. We also do not expect this interpretation
11to be static over time, and will adjust it as needed.
12
13The Linux kernel development effort is a very personal process compared
14to "traditional" ways of developing software. Your contributions and
15ideas behind them will be carefully reviewed, often resulting in
16critique and criticism. The review will almost always require
17improvements before the material can be included in the
18kernel. Know that this happens because everyone involved wants to see
19the best possible solution for the overall success of Linux. This
20development process has been proven to create the most robust operating
21system kernel ever, and we do not want to do anything to cause the
22quality of submission and eventual result to ever decrease.
23
24Maintainers
25-----------
26
27The Code of Conduct uses the term "maintainers" numerous times. In the
28kernel community, a "maintainer" is anyone who is responsible for a
29subsystem, driver, or file, and is listed in the MAINTAINERS file in the
30kernel source tree.
31
32Responsibilities
33----------------
34
35The Code of Conduct mentions rights and responsibilities for
36maintainers, and this needs some further clarifications.
37
38First and foremost, it is a reasonable expectation to have maintainers
39lead by example.
40
41That being said, our community is vast and broad, and there is no new
42requirement for maintainers to unilaterally handle how other people
43behave in the parts of the community where they are active. That
44responsibility is upon all of us, and ultimately the Code of Conduct
45documents final escalation paths in case of unresolved concerns
46regarding conduct issues.
47
48Maintainers should be willing to help when problems occur, and work with
49others in the community when needed. Do not be afraid to reach out to
50the Technical Advisory Board (TAB) or other maintainers if you're
51uncertain how to handle situations that come up. It will not be
52considered a violation report unless you want it to be. If you are
53uncertain about approaching the TAB or any other maintainers, please
54reach out to our conflict mediator, Joanna Lee <jlee@linuxfoundation.org>.
55
56In the end, "be kind to each other" is really what the end goal is for
57everybody. We know everyone is human and we all fail at times, but the
58primary goal for all of us should be to work toward amicable resolutions
59of problems. Enforcement of the code of conduct will only be a last
60resort option.
61
62Our goal of creating a robust and technically advanced operating system
63and the technical complexity involved naturally require expertise and
64decision-making.
65
66The required expertise varies depending on the area of contribution. It
67is determined mainly by context and technical complexity and only
68secondary by the expectations of contributors and maintainers.
69
70Both the expertise expectations and decision-making are subject to
71discussion, but at the very end there is a basic necessity to be able to
72make decisions in order to make progress. This prerogative is in the
73hands of maintainers and project's leadership and is expected to be used
74in good faith.
75
76As a consequence, setting expertise expectations, making decisions and
77rejecting unsuitable contributions are not viewed as a violation of the
78Code of Conduct.
79
80While maintainers are in general welcoming to newcomers, their capacity
81of helping contributors overcome the entry hurdles is limited, so they
82have to set priorities. This, also, is not to be seen as a violation of
83the Code of Conduct. The kernel community is aware of that and provides
84entry level programs in various forms like kernelnewbies.org.
85
86Scope
87-----
88
89The Linux kernel community primarily interacts on a set of public email
90lists distributed around a number of different servers controlled by a
91number of different companies or individuals. All of these lists are
92defined in the MAINTAINERS file in the kernel source tree. Any emails
93sent to those mailing lists are considered covered by the Code of
94Conduct.
95
96Developers who use the kernel.org bugzilla, and other subsystem bugzilla
97or bug tracking tools should follow the guidelines of the Code of
98Conduct. The Linux kernel community does not have an "official" project
99email address, or "official" social media address. Any activity
100performed using a kernel.org email account must follow the Code of
101Conduct as published for kernel.org, just as any individual using a
102corporate email account must follow the specific rules of that
103corporation.
104
105The Code of Conduct does not prohibit continuing to include names, email
106addresses, and associated comments in mailing list messages, kernel
107change log messages, or code comments.
108
109Interaction in other forums is covered by whatever rules apply to said
110forums and is in general not covered by the Code of Conduct. Exceptions
111may be considered for extreme circumstances.
112
113Contributions submitted for the kernel should use appropriate language.
114Content that already exists predating the Code of Conduct will not be
115addressed now as a violation. Inappropriate language can be seen as a
116bug, though; such bugs will be fixed more quickly if any interested
117parties submit patches to that effect. Expressions that are currently
118part of the user/kernel API, or reflect terminology used in published
119standards or specifications, are not considered bugs.
120
121Enforcement
122-----------
123
124The address listed in the Code of Conduct goes to the Code of Conduct
125Committee. The exact members receiving these emails at any given time
126are listed at https://kernel.org/code-of-conduct.html. Members can not
127access reports made before they joined or after they have left the
128committee.
129
130The Code of Conduct Committee consists of volunteer community members
131appointed by the TAB, as well as a professional mediator acting as a
132neutral third party. The processes the Code of Conduct committee will
133use to address reports is varied and will depend on the individual
134circumstance, however, this file serves as documentation for the
135general process used.
136
137Any member of the committee, including the mediator, can be contacted
138directly if a reporter does not wish to include the full committee in a
139complaint or concern.
140
141The Code of Conduct Committee reviews the cases according to the
142processes (see above) and consults with the TAB as needed and
143appropriate, for instance to request and receive information about the
144kernel community.
145
146Any decisions regarding enforcement recommendations will be brought to
147the TAB for implementation of enforcement with the relevant maintainers
148if needed. A decision by the Code of Conduct Committee can be overturned
149by the TAB by a two-thirds vote.
150
151At quarterly intervals, the Code of Conduct Committee and TAB will
152provide a report summarizing the anonymised reports that the Code of
153Conduct committee has received and their status, as well details of any
154overridden decisions including complete and identifiable voting details.
155
156Because how we interpret and enforce the Code of Conduct will evolve over
157time, this document will be updated when necessary to reflect any
158changes.
159
160Enforcement for Unacceptable Behavior Code of Conduct Violations
161----------------------------------------------------------------
162
163The Code of Conduct committee works to ensure that our community continues
164to be inclusive and fosters diverse discussions and viewpoints, and works
165to improve those characteristics over time. A majority of the reports the
166Code of Conduct Committee receives stem from incorrect understanding regarding
167the development process and maintainers' roles, responsibilities, and their
168right to make decisions on code acceptance. These are resolved through
169clarification of the development process and the scope of the Code of Conduct.
170
171Unacceptable behaviors could interrupt respectful collaboration for a short
172period of time and negatively impact the health of the community longer term.
173Unacceptable behaviors often get resolved when individuals acknowledge their
174behavior and make amends for it in the setting the violation has taken place.
175
176The Code of Conduct Committee receives reports about unacceptable behaviors
177when they don't get resolved through community discussions. The Code of
178Conduct committee takes measures to restore productive and respectful
179collaboration when an unacceptable behavior has negatively impacted that
180relationship.
181
182The Code of Conduct Committee has the obligation to keep the reports and
183reporters' information private. Reports could come from injured parties
184and community members who are observers of unacceptable behaviors. The
185Code of Conduct Committee has the responsibility to investigate and resolve
186these reports, working with all involved parties.
187
188The Code of Conduct Committee works with the individual to bring about
189change in their understanding of the importance to repair the damage caused
190by their behavior to the injured party and the long term negative impact
191on the community.
192
193The goal is to reach a resolution which is agreeable to all parties. If
194working with the individual fails to bring about the desired outcome, the
195Code of Conduct Committee will evaluate other measures such as seeking
196public apology to repair the damage.
197
198Seek public apology for the violation
199~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
200
201The Code of Conduct Committee publicly calls out the behavior in the
202setting in which the violation has taken place, seeking public apology
203for the violation.
204
205A public apology for the violation is the first step towards rebuilding
206the trust. Trust is essential for the continued success and health of the
207community which operates on trust and respect.
208
209Remedial measures if there is no public apology for the violation
210~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
211
212The Code of Conduct Committee determines the next course of action to restore
213the healthy collaboration by recommending remedial measure(s) to the TAB for
214approval.
215
216- Ban violator from participating in the kernel development process for
217 a period of up to a full kernel development cycle. The Code of Conduct
218 Committee could require public apology as a condition for lifting the
219 ban.
220
221The scope of the ban for a period of time could include:
222
223 a. denying patch contributions and pull requests
224 b. pausing collaboration with the violator by ignoring their
225 contributions and/or blocking their email account(s)
226 c. restricting their ability to communicate via kernel.org platforms,
227 such as mailing lists and social media sites
228
229Once the TAB approves one or more of the measures outlined in the scope of
230the ban by a two-thirds vote, the Code of Conduct Committee will enforce
231the TAB approved measure(s) in collaboration with the community, maintainers,
232sub-maintainers, and kernel.org administrators.
233
234The Code of Conduct Committee is mindful of the negative impact of seeking
235public apology and instituting ban could have on individuals. It is also
236mindful of the longer term harm to the community that could result from
237not taking action when such serious public violations occur.
238
239The effectiveness of the remedial measure(s) approved by the TAB depends
240on the trust and cooperation from the community, maintainers, sub-maintainers,
241and kernel.org administrators in enforcing them.
242
243The Code of Conduct Committee sincerely hopes that unacceptable behaviors
244that require seeking public apologies continue to be exceedingly rare
245occurrences in the future.