From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org)
	by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <gentoo-dev+bounces-18427-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@gentoo.org>)
	id 1GepDZ-0000Iu-LP
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 08:43:34 +0000
Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.6) with SMTP id k9V8gASd001697;
	Tue, 31 Oct 2006 08:42:10 GMT
Received: from atom.dmkhost.net (atom.dmkhost.net [67.15.82.32])
	by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k9V8cngP021213
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 08:38:50 GMT
Received: from quanteam.pl ([195.60.65.10]:45163 helo=[192.168.0.50])
	by atom.dmkhost.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256)
	(Exim 4.52)
	id 1Gep9F-0006Kp-QW
	for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 09:39:06 +0100
From: =?iso-8859-2?q?Pawe=B3_Madej?= <linux@quanteam.info>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Only you can prevent broken portage trees
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0610291940390.17995@stargazer.weeve.org> <200610310857.02169.linux@quanteam.info> <454703FC.6000101@gentoo.org>
In-Reply-To: <454703FC.6000101@gentoo.org>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Length: 2380
X-UID: 1716
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 09:38:39 +0100
Content-Type: multipart/signed;
  boundary="nextPart1385620.xNSPVJr4cN";
  protocol="application/pgp-signature";
  micalg=pgp-sha1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <200610310938.39485.linux@quanteam.info>
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - atom.dmkhost.net
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - lists.gentoo.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - quanteam.info
X-Source: 
X-Source-Args: 
X-Source-Dir: 
X-Archives-Salt: 639e0794-8887-4f67-af04-5cbb215dd2ed
X-Archives-Hash: 9b76705b428d7deab54f757154dac051

--nextPart1385620.xNSPVJr4cN
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-2"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

Dnia wtorek, 31 pa=BCdziernika 2006 09:06, David Shakaryan napisa=B3:
> Pawe=B3 Madej wrote:
> > I'm not a dev but I suppose i got resolution for that problem. Lets make
> > another subproject (don't know how to name it properly) in bugzilla in
> > which there will be only bugs affected by security flaw. That bugs will
> > have highest priority from every other ones. And devs would have to look
> > at them firstly
>
> What's wrong with simply setting high priority or severity on a bug like
> you can currently do?

=46rom user point of view while I report new bug I can set piority and seve=
rity=20
to what I want, everybody could. Then bug-wranglers have to point that bug =
to=20
suitable herd/dev so he is informed about a bug. But such bugs as I was sai=
d=20
before are hundreds. Bugs in Gentoo Security as Mike proposed are lot less,=
=20
so devs could concentrate on them and next go to common bugs category.

I don't know if it is possible to make it so, but I hope I helped a little.

Greets
Pawe=B3 Madej (Nysander)

--nextPart1385620.xNSPVJr4cN
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBFRwuPo2oxFA/3hf8RAiYxAJ4q1KYfgopZcMQZHByAy9fRn5JYPACgkfZ7
YKNFdmYDWOxD5ZhQFejd+88=
=4PO/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--nextPart1385620.xNSPVJr4cN--
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list