Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: On dropping sparc@ from CC on bugs

[Sergei Trofimovich <slyfox@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1570 bytes --]

On Wed, 13 Sep 2017 22:44:23 -0400
Yury German <blueknight@gentoo.org> wrote:

Thank you! That's very helpful. A few clarifying questions below
to be absolutely clear.

> OK so let me repeat the comments that were made on @dev  (and expand a bit further) and close the issue.
> 
> 1. Maintainers are free to cc the non-stable and experimental arches as part of their call for stabilization. It is up to the maintainer of the package to decide.
> 
> 2. This is providing that there is no problems caused by stableboy or extra dependencies raised
> Note: as a follow up change was made: 07:47 <@kensington> leio: b-man: good point, dropped sparc from stable_arches
> 
> 3. Clean up is required as part of the security bug process, and if an arch is holding it up (example hppa before Slyfox took it over) an issue would have to be raised with the QA team for action. [1]

'Cleanup' is only vulnerabe ebuild removal, not CC removal from the bug, right?

> 4. Bugs will be closed without waiting for any non-security supported arches, once the security process is complete.

CC for exp lagging arches are not removed from the bug, right?

> 5. Security bugs are not re-assigned since they are assigned as a vulnerability in bugzilla. If you need to continue work on the bug, please feel free to open another bug for the particular arch for stabilization, fix, etc.
> 
> If you have any questions please let me know.
> 
> 
> [1] - https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Security/GLSA_Coordinator_Guide#Bugs_in_.5Bcleanup.5D_status

-- 

  Sergei

[-- Attachment #2: Цифровая подпись OpenPGP --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]