Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Pacho Ramos <pacho@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: About changing security policy to unCC maintainers when their are not needed
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 18:56:40
Message-Id: 1347476047.2365.15.camel@belkin4
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Re: About changing security policy to unCC maintainers when their are not needed by Michael Palimaka
1 El jue, 13-09-2012 a las 04:30 +1000, Michael Palimaka escribió:
2 > On 2012-09-13 03:59, Pacho Ramos wrote:
3 > > Hello
4 > >
5 > > Currently, package maintainers are CCed to security bugs when their are
6 > > needed. The problem is that, once maintainers add a fixed version and
7 > > tell security team they are ok to get it stabilized, maintainers are
8 > > kept CCed until bug is closed by security team. This usually means
9 > > getting a lot of mail after some time when security team discuss if a
10 > > GLSA should be filled or not, if security bot adds some comment... some
11 > > of that comments are applied to really old bugs that need no action from
12 > > maintainers.
13 > >
14 > > Maybe would be interesting to change the policy to unCC maintainers
15 > > again when their action is no longer required.
16 > >
17 > > What do you think?
18 > >
19 > > Thanks for your thoughts
20 > >
21 >
22 > Hello,
23 >
24 > Is the policy you describe officially documented, or just current behaviour?
25 >
26
27 I don't know, at least it's the current behavior, but I don't know if
28 it's a policy :/
29
30 > In KDE and Qt herds for example, we usually just unCC ourselves when
31 > we've taken the required action.
32 >
33 > Best regards,
34 > Michael
35 >
36 >
37 >

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies