Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> writes: > On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 at 11:23, Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de> wrote: >> Or consider the case you get a bug report not copied to the public >> mailing lists from someone you don't know. Then I would still expect to >> be allowed to attribute a commit via Reported-by/CC to that person, as >> it seems in his/her interest to get the bug fixed and be notified, >> unless explicitly requested otherwise. > > FWIW, in this kind of situation, I generally try to explicitly > ask the submitter if they're OK with my adding a reported-by > tag, just as a matter of politeness. Not everybody is OK with > having their email address publicly recorded on mailing list > archives and in git history forever.
That's what I'd do, too. Still, neglecting to ask for permission to publicly credit a bug report is not anywhere near doxing. If the public credit turns out to be unwanted, a sincere apology is obviously called for. People may exist who need to be slapped over the head with a code of conduct to figure that out. I hope we'll never need to do that. Anyway. What I see at work here is one of the unintended consequences of formal codes of conduct: they read like law, so people read them lawyerly. Our CoC attempts to avoid this by explicitly stating its *purpose*: "a guide to make it easier to be excellent to each other." This applies to the QEMU leadership committee in spades. Treating negligent publication of some technical e-mail's sender address as malicious doxing wouldn't be excellent to anyone, it would be the leadership committee shooting themselves into the foot with a machine gun". Let's not worry about that, okay?
