From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JBOWa-00069P-5O for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 05:58:20 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A950EE03CF; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 05:58:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A2CCE0296 for ; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 05:58:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.150] (adsl-65-67-72-193.dsl.fyvlar.swbell.net [65.67.72.193]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 513B365F2A for ; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 03:36:08 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <47804C98.5050008@gentoo.org> Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2008 21:35:52 -0600 From: Martin Jackson User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) 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 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for January References: <20080101103002.083C4652C4@smtp.gentoo.org> <54551.192.168.2.159.1199365359.squirrel@www.aei-tech.com> <477D75CA.1030003@gentoo.org> <20080104000155.23e056b4@snowcone> <20080104004653.039f488e@snowcone> <20080104012750.63f4f23a@snowcone> <63044.68.54.223.178.1199445791.squirrel@www.aei-tech.com> <20080104210213.50a99e6b@snowcone> <61164.68.54.223.178.1199485599.squirrel@www.aei-tech.com> <20080104223754.3fb48b85@snowcone> <1199506818.7609.30.camel@inertia.twi-31o2.org> <20080105043233.0935d2f8@snowcone> <20080105124751.0bef4908@gentoo.org> <20080106003246.6e4b6425@snowcone> <20080106013630.7e0a504b@snowcone> <47803A61.7000600@gentoo.org> <20080106022402.01174707@snowcone> <47803DA9.10000@gentoo.org> <20080106023852.25b42e4b@snowcone> <47804281.3010000@gentoo.org> <20080106025825.2bedc1f1@snowcone> In-Reply-To: <20080106025825.2bedc1f1@snowcone> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: ceb01d91-5f58-4f7f-8977-0fe0e182a1b4 X-Archives-Hash: fd2cb68d02edc8055b176c7d3c74151b Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 20:52:49 -0600 > Martin Jackson wrote: >> That's making the assumption that anyone looked at it, of course. >> Please note comment #9 on >> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=198346. It was still ~8 days >> from then that the setuptools keyword was added. >> >> So, we have examples of impact due to delay in keywords/etc. Shall >> we proceed with the discussion of what to do about it? > > http://www.gentoo.org/security/en/vulnerability-policy.xml > > The target for that GLSA was 20 days. 8 days is well within target. > What are you moaning about? > The original topic of this conversation was about what to do about an arch that is obviously not as responsive as other arches. This is a concrete example of that fact, which you requested. This seems to be a topic frequently discussed here. Who knows how long that request would have languished if not for the security bug? As you said, when there are so many requests and so few people to service them, they all have the same priority, unless there's something to elevate their priority. Ciaran, I think you've made my point far more eloquently than I could have myself. Thanks for your time and attention to this matter. Marty -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list