Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: Remove some entries due to various compliance requirements.

 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
   ` Wolfram Sang
   ` Lukas Wunner
   ` James Bottomley [this message]
     ` NotYourFox
       ` 14071 | " Michael Shigorin
         ` Vladimir Smirnov
     ` Angry Dev
     ` John Mcenroy
     ` metux
 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
 ` WangYuli
   ` Mingcong Bai
     ` [PATCH] Revert "MAINTAINERS: Remove some entries due to various compliance requirements." Kexy Biscuit
       ` Nikita Travkin
         ` WangYuli
       ` Mingcong Bai
       ` Tonghao Zhang
       ` Nikita Shubin
       ` Lance Yang
       ` Yangyu Chen
       ` Sergio Paracuellos
       ` Yao Zi
       ` Tor Vic
         ` Linus Torvalds
           ` Phillip Susi
           ` Peter Cai
             ` Linus Torvalds
               ` Peter Cai
               ` Mikhail Novosyolov
                 ` Nikolay Kichukov
           ` Tor Vic
           ` NotYourFox
           ` Integral
           ` crupest
           ` what about CoC? (was: [PATCH] Revert "MAINTAINERS: Remove some entries due to various compliance requirements.") Michael Shigorin
             ` Wanglei
             ` Wanglei
             ` Michael Shigorin
               ` what about CoC? Alexander Lobakin
                 ` Michael Shigorin
           ` [PATCH] Revert "MAINTAINERS: Remove some entries due to various compliance requirements." B4D_US3R
           ` Ivan Epifanov
             ` Andy Shevchenko
               ` Guenter Roeck
                 ` Ivan Epifanov
                   ` Guenter Roeck
                     ` Ivan Epifanov
                 ` Nopempele N
                 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
               ` Ivan Epifanov
                 ` Sergey Shtylyov
           ` [PATCH 0/2] MAINTAINERS: Remove few Chinese Entries Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin
             ` [PATCH 1/2] MAINTAINERS: Remove Huawei due to compilance requirements Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin
               ` lore.kernel.org getting senile ? [WAS: " metux
             ` [PATCH 2/2] MAINTAINERS: Remove Loongson " Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin
             ` [PATCH 0/2] MAINTAINERS: Remove few Chinese Entries NotYourFox
           ` The destruction of Linux [WAS [PATCH] Revert "MAINTAINERS: Remove some entries due to various compliance requirements."] Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
             ` [NOTIFICATION] Linux Mailing List - New Messages Vladimir Putin
           ` [PATCH] Revert "MAINTAINERS: Remove some entries due to various compliance requirements." Tor Vic
       ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
         ` Andy Shevchenko
           ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
     ` [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: Remove some entries due to various compliance requirements Mingcong Bai
       ` WangYuli
       ` Jiaxun Yang
         ` Mingcong Bai
 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
 ` Nikita Shubin
 ` [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: Remove some entries due to various moral requirements Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
 ` [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: Remove some entries due to various compliance requirements Alexander Pevzner
 Anna Antonenko
 jisralbasha
 Jensen Huang
 ` 陈寒彤
 Joe Putin

> On Fri, 18 Oct 2024, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > Remove some entries due to various compliance requirements. They
> > can come back in the future if sufficient documentation is
> > provided.
> 
> This is very vague...

We finally got clearance to publish the actual advice:

   If your company is on the U.S. OFAC SDN lists, subject to an OFAC
   sanctions program, or owned/controlled by a company on the list, our
   ability to collaborate with you will be subject to restrictions, and
   you cannot be in the MAINTAINERS file.

> What are "various compliance requirements"?
> What does "sufficient documentation" mean?

The documentation Greg is looking for (which a group of Lawyers at the
LF will verify) is that someone in the removed list doesn't actually
work for an OFAC SDN sanctioned entity.

> I can guess, but I think it's better to spell out the rules, as Linux
> kernel development is done "in the open". I am also afraid this is
> opening the door for further (ab)use...

I agree we should have been more transparent about this but I think it
would be hard for someone other than Greg to get a Maintainer removed
on the "compliance issue" grounds so it's probably not that open to
abuse.

Regards,

James