List Archive: gentoo-security
Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.c.f. bug 424647
Rich Freeman wrote, on 08/27/2011 03:06 PM:
> However, that isn't really what we're discussing here. What we're
> talking about is GLSAs vs no GLSAs. Working automated GLSAs
> apparently don't exist right now. It is wonderful that a bunch of
> people are looking to change that, however it doesn't really change
> the fact that we're not sending out GLSAs, and that makes it hard for
> people to take Gentoo seriously as a distro.
Yes, we are aware of that. We know it's very unfortunate, but just
*stating* it doesn't get us more manpower.
> If the new tool were
> just a few weeks away then a few posts to -dev/-security updating
> status would probably alleviate concerns. However, I think that
> people have been talking about fixing the GLSA tool for ages now.
We currently believe the tool *is* just a few weeks away; we plan to
meet in person at the end of September. But I don't want to promise
anything as real life may get in the way anytime.
> I think the fundamental problem is failing to distinguish between
> operations and improvements. You can't put the former on hold to work
> on the latter.
Sure, but that is not the case. It's still possible to use the old
GLSAmaker and send out advisories; the problem is manpower. No-one
currently wants to do the work with the old tool (And no, editing XML
files manually won't motivate people either).
> When resource constraints hit a volunteer project, the solution is
> usually to create a more distributed solution.
That's similar to the bug wrangling situation a while ago. The queue was
huge and everyone knew we needed more people to wrangle the bugs. But
how many people actually did that for more than a few? Not even a handful.
Having maintainers "care" about security just won't work out. That's why
the security team exists in the first place.