Received: by 2002:ac0:a5a6:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id m35-v6csp1519260imm; Wed, 19 Sep 2018 21:16:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdZDjjAs9n+nph/i5aX5QDTKQBSRzmrqCZ3HZo8kkChN5tr0CBs7HKYv7ZxyCiFg8URQhMKi X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:3041:: with SMTP id u59-v6mr36518633plb.99.1537416978419; Wed, 19 Sep 2018 21:16:18 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1537416978; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=fTamdrdGwXfBM5ZXL7pJRbhHzH2hP/qKAFHHgkpYTLiPKK+HyzNMRubLmuO+5hWpbv 4xA39IcqCAjeqo7C/HFY4w/qM4I9CB4kCOfrdp+C3iOuj2u2XwFyk2IO/OcsWJtEsgz3 FzuDLODHSEClpp/ukrj34rR/YY/BD9IHCnrcPOcnlkumEsruBQRJ/88fuL/B/gONbKnZ 0SrNAyBrE7SxQnVAJNq9pppCZ55Mq9WgYCX0MA8C+xZv3tddorvlkvCbuP8Kbbk76i7m euNgx1M4gp7gguKC53NWxyAaEZrdWcKrIhCGOwIqcNKtjoExPd6sEUZWixnBDSywaymp pMLQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:mail-followup-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:dkim-signature; bh=DOM+L0kfI9GhFO1nJSc6/GwyTqOwf24jjsCgzkAhFVs=; b=D4P58vw4W/JwqPgyIS4N0UwAB+WQzOM6n10jeJlqPebjbfTokPaYb+phoIdNsqIkFB V80sz/bCcJnpnTTobwWnJj0ERijAtbA+IeNx1QOSd1TXpU1zYSWZia/VS8SBcTPexxV0 R0j0lFpYfEVbcqSDXgDH2wLfvq8hee30bV+qIBcdD9zVBGk2CDGGKTldsXDWfsIM8zv7 MGLvE11six1jW/ia6DgIVC31WU51HXttbga2GZyirguI2ZFBfoWiYSZzfUussw4J9fiJ /wbKSb4cSDuVm3ZecFNPgy3AOEJZiCfCci8OttyWJi+GoOO5gnSl0xTFheq7cysfMKFy HzqQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=fail header.i=@thunk.org header.s=ef5046eb header.b=QUvkm7lO; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id s20-v6si22747303pgk.87.2018.09.19.21.15.21; Wed, 19 Sep 2018 21:16:18 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=fail header.i=@thunk.org header.s=ef5046eb header.b=QUvkm7lO; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1733243AbeITItB (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 20 Sep 2018 04:49:01 -0400 Received: from imap.thunk.org ([74.207.234.97]:53062 "EHLO imap.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1732171AbeITItB (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Sep 2018 04:49:01 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=thunk.org; s=ef5046eb; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID: Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=DOM+L0kfI9GhFO1nJSc6/GwyTqOwf24jjsCgzkAhFVs=; b=QUvkm7lOdS9YQp7VtJCmtAWsC8 tGVOoVj9S+thtNfRjzPu1OjGVeUUwQCeBazV2spz6J+8UXGPTo6QS8INHtu9nSrEOnzoKkxYz85ot rSIuVWYRFc6R2L7TwuuaCPvs+Ct1uGvp9pzFv3GO5Vlgu1SYw3n3S8LGS90K5FSvJAjk=; Received: from root (helo=callcc.thunk.org) by imap.thunk.org with local-esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1g2pJn-0003uT-Cs; Thu, 20 Sep 2018 03:07:51 +0000 Received: by callcc.thunk.org (Postfix, from userid 15806) id BBF197A0187; Wed, 19 Sep 2018 23:07:49 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2018 23:07:49 -0400 From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" To: Olof Johansson Cc: Edward Cree , Jonathan Corbet , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Code of Conduct: Let's revamp it. Message-ID: <20180920030749.GA29741@thunk.org> Mail-Followup-To: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" , Olof Johansson , Edward Cree , Jonathan Corbet , Linux Kernel Mailing List References: <20180919081812.020f19e3@lwn.net> <72dadc76-44fe-ecb5-e142-0a9129082c93@cantab.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: tytso@thunk.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on imap.thunk.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 02:16:40AM +0100, Olof Johansson wrote: > > But there are too many ways this can go wrong, maybe not now or next > > week but in five or ten years, when maybe a different kind of person > > is on the TAB, or maybe external pressure is brought to bear on TAB > > members. > > One thing to keep in mind is that we all want what is best for Linux, > to make the best possible kernel. None of this has changed that. > > I personally find it unlikely that relevant pressure could be applied > on TAB members; I don't find it a prestigious role such that it is > worth holding on to against my own values or best judgement. Even *if* pressure could be applied to TAB members, it's important to remember that the TAB as a body gets its influence and moral authority from the people who have agreed to serve on it, and not the other way around. People join the TAB because they want to serve. It's not because being on the TAB grants some kind of mystical power, because it doesn't. Ultimately, the "A" in TAB stands for Advisory. The TAB does not get to control whether patches gets accepted into the linux-media git tree. Mauro gets to decide that. The TAB does not get to control whether or not Linus accepts pull requests from a subsystem maintainer; that's up to Linus. The TAB doesn't run vger.kernel.org. That's done by David Miller. Look at what happened when a particular developer decided to do the anti-social thing and become a copyright troll. It was not the TAB which decided that no further code contributions should be accepted from that particular person. It was the Netfilter team. Linux Maintainers have always had the power to reject patches for any reason. It isn't just for technical reasons, as the Netfilter team demonstrated with the copyright troll. (Of course, the person whose patch has been rejected can always appeal to Linus, by sending the patch directly to Linus. None of this has changed; it always has been this way.) The TAB can make a recommendation, but the decision to act on that recommendation resides with the Maintainers in general, and ultimately, Linus. - Ted