lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Jul]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 463 kernel developers missing!
On 30-07-08 18:56, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> The fact is, people who are involved in Linux know it's public.
> People make public bug-reports, and they _expect_ to get attributed.

The problem here is just the _scale_ of publicness. Yes, Adrian's worry
can be shrugged of I'd say but this thread is about Jon Smirl collecting
addresses into a hugely public (because in tree) and hugely accessible
format and while your statement above might be true for 95% of cases
(99, I don't care) the use of people's personalia is just something you
cannot decide on yourself ever. It's theirs.

I'm in this thread because the from address on this message is in Jon's
file and while I've used it myself in the past, any time it's been part
of some Fooed-by tag recently it's because someone else put it there.
While it's the best address I have for these uses (and so I still use
it) it shouldn't work anymore even today, so I've been careful to put a
future proof relay address in when I advertise a contact myself.

As said before, I'm also not going to whine about it when others do put
it in because they shouldn't need to concern themselves with my odd
needs and wants and it's not a real problem anyway as long as the future
proof one is much _more_ public. I am, therefore, just not glad that
it's now being put into a file in the root of your highly publicized
tree of files.

Just a silly example, I know, but it doesn't really matter -- even if
someone tells me he fears cosmic channeling will get the better of him
if his personalia are in some resource I maintain, I jump to attention,
salute, shout "SIR YES SIR!" and remove it. It's his.

So now for example I'm debugging a problem with an ALSA driver with a
few users at least one of which has used different email addresses
during it and if I'm going to attribute any of their testing and effort,
I'm going to have to ask for permission and which address was meant to
be the public one. And sure, sure, I'd probably do that even today
anyway but right now it's mostly a principled thing while with the
addresses in the tree I'd sort of insist that anyone would, what with
them being top google hits for ever more.

So, if you were doing more than responding to Adrian's DCO worry here
(which I do not share) the above is what I have against harvesting the
addresses into a _way_ too public place/format. It's a matter of scale;
as opposed to the SCM metadata, your tree itself is way too public to
put anything in without very definite and explicit approval. I feel.
Rene.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-07-30 21:41    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site