Em Wed, 13 Nov 2024 11:59:39 +0100 Simona Vetter <simona.vetter@xxxxxxxx> escreveu: > On Wed, 13 Nov 2024 at 11:55, Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On 13.11.24 11:26, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2024 at 09:35:03AM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > >> Remind developers to not expose private email addresses, as some people > > >> become upset if their addresses end up in the lore archives or the Linux > > >> git tree. > > >> > > >> While at it, explicitly mention the dangers of our bugzilla instance > > >> here, as it makes it easy to forget that email addresses visible there > > >> are only shown to logged-in users. > > >> > > >> These are not a theoretical issues, as one maintainer mentioned that > > >> his employer received a EU GDPR (general data protection regulation) > > >> complaint after exposuring a email address used in bugzilla through a > > >> tag in a patch description. > > >> > > >> Signed-off-by: Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > >> --- > > >> Note: this triggers a few checkpatch.pl complaints that are irrelevant > > >> when when ti comes to changes like this. > > >> > > >> v1: > > >> - initial version > > >> --- > > >> Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst | 17 +++++++++--- > > >> Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst | 27 +++++++++++++++++--- > > >> 2 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > >> > > >> diff --git a/Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst b/Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst > > >> index b3eff03ea2491c..1f6942948db349 100644 > > >> --- a/Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst > > >> +++ b/Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst > > >> @@ -264,10 +264,19 @@ The tags in common use are: > > >> - Cc: the named person received a copy of the patch and had the > > >> opportunity to comment on it. > > >> > > >> -Be careful in the addition of tags to your patches, as only Cc: is appropriate > > >> -for addition without the explicit permission of the person named; using > > >> -Reported-by: is fine most of the time as well, but ask for permission if > > >> -the bug was reported in private. > > >> +Note, remember to respect other people's privacy when adding these tags: > > >> + > > >> + - Only specify email addresses, if owners explicitly permitted their use or > > >> + are fine with exposing them to the public based on previous actions found in > > >> + the lore archives. There is no comma between "addresses" and "if". "previous actions" sounds a little to vague. Also, the text doesn't cover everything, as lore archives may contain gaps. I would, instead be clear: - Only specify email addresses if owners explicitly permitted their use or if such e-mail was previously used publicly for Linux contributions, which can be checked by looking at the lore archives and at the git log. I added "git log there" because, in practice, nobody has the time to double-check what e-mails are public: developers rely that scripts/checkpatch.pl will check git log when creating the Cc: list. Thanks, Mauro
