Code of Conduct Interpretation: Add document explaining how the Code of...

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.

   howto

   code-of-conduct

   code-of-conduct-interpretation

   development-process

   submitting-patches

   coding-style