From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC8ED138010 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 18:56:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7C3AE21C038; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 18:55:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6B9F21C026 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 18:54:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.33] (198.red-80-29-44.adsl.static.ccgg.telefonica.net [80.29.44.198]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: pacho) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 746A133CE33 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 18:54:11 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: About changing security policy to unCC maintainers when their are not needed From: Pacho Ramos To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <5050D4AF.1010205@gentoo.org> References: <1347472741.2365.5.camel@belkin4> <5050D4AF.1010205@gentoo.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-xbFSI6yw6YAjPqJasp9A" Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 20:54:07 +0200 Message-ID: <1347476047.2365.15.camel@belkin4> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.3 X-Archives-Salt: a0dc1a97-3f29-4894-b6c0-dab07258308f X-Archives-Hash: 669839623d0a5524011e77c3a24a56d6 --=-xbFSI6yw6YAjPqJasp9A Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable El jue, 13-09-2012 a las 04:30 +1000, Michael Palimaka escribi=C3=B3: > On 2012-09-13 03:59, Pacho Ramos wrote: > > Hello > > > > Currently, package maintainers are CCed to security bugs when their are > > needed. The problem is that, once maintainers add a fixed version and > > tell security team they are ok to get it stabilized, maintainers are > > kept CCed until bug is closed by security team. This usually means > > getting a lot of mail after some time when security team discuss if a > > GLSA should be filled or not, if security bot adds some comment... some > > of that comments are applied to really old bugs that need no action fro= m > > maintainers. > > > > Maybe would be interesting to change the policy to unCC maintainers > > again when their action is no longer required. > > > > What do you think? > > > > Thanks for your thoughts > > >=20 > Hello, >=20 > Is the policy you describe officially documented, or just current behavio= ur? >=20 I don't know, at least it's the current behavior, but I don't know if it's a policy :/ > In KDE and Qt herds for example, we usually just unCC ourselves when=20 > we've taken the required action. >=20 > Best regards, > Michael >=20 >=20 >=20 --=-xbFSI6yw6YAjPqJasp9A Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAlBQ2k8ACgkQCaWpQKGI+9Rm9QCdE2QD3pG8+ifo1F4TGBZgOBG9 2HMAnjrCfxhvYu10zOePc3vtNX8sH4ge =juy7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-xbFSI6yw6YAjPqJasp9A--