On Mon, Jul 07, 2025 at 07:27:48AM +0530, Ayush Chandekar wrote: > > > >Where is this reference to "Linux kernel" come from? Shouldn't we > >name our own project and adopt this new language for our own rules? > > > >And yes, total anonymity goes directly against provenance traceability, > >so it is not a passive "unfortunately we cannot accept" with regret; > >it is a lot more active and positive "we must not accept an > >anonymous contributions." Well, the SubmittingPatches originally came from the Linux Kernel, and the policies and procedures that were adopted by the Linux Kernel comes from a lot of hard won experience which the git project might want to consider. In addition, it was also informed with a lot of advice and review of lawyers employed or contracted by the Linux Foundation. (The Developers of Certification Origin had quite a lot of input for lawyers to make sure it would work in multiple legal jourisdictions.) So for example, it's not just about copyright concerns vis-a-vis anonymous contributions. It's also about OFAC Sanctions[1], since an anonymous contributor might be someone working for a Sanctioned Entity trying to bypass them. [1] https://www.linuxfoundation.org/blog/navigating-global-regulations-and-open-source-us-ofac-sanctions (And note, it's not just about the US Sanctions; there are very similar, and in some cases, stricter sanctions promulgated by other countries, including Japan, Switzerland, Australia, the United Kingdom, the European Union --- and this is not a comprehesive list. For better or for worse, the Russian Federation has managed to annoy quite a large number of countries, and many of us either live in, or work for companies domiciled in one of them. If you work for a company which is a member of te Linux Foundation, Mike Dolan or some other LF lawyer should have reached out to your General Counsel; so talk to your legal department.) Cheers, - Ted
