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 1DDEA138010 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 18:43:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 60FBBE0534; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 18:43:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-bk0-f53.google.com (mail-bk0-f53.google.com [209.85.214.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FC9321C036 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 18:42:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: by bkwj4 with SMTP id j4so91015bkw.40 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 11:42:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=HbH7LRNVD5DGkR9oX+imSQzjd08tM4JyI1TFvW4+GjM=; b=P73ipSa5dqJVYDc7N0T6QCOkSNMnPfGfgsCmO7QqaOC+lsewtbiagikSUBRSGAyq/W zVADmE4GPwmCzq6rQi+7TOQsvt8ZCsXTyjXeCHk4xyQYsaylLG1KDWlZNywfyHUqp/z1 jZsxevXeVFRBkQXOd66pGp1ook+GK150fPU/9pZ6Z80y1E2RVWYGkWbn7RYVn45rE8TT TSg3UddbBqEptba4TK8dgrDed/Je+G4Kev+n6tvx2nfsq/mzuiUL+x/HMspdB+tWki0u r3lwGi7nJ8rbmYSK8NeRnp1DcewD3jq2Cu5lkLy4y6zaPUuAl4Kj3PXxRplBlCOU+Y4C Q4yw== 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 Received: by 10.204.152.13 with SMTP id e13mr3395875bkw.10.1347475335234; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 11:42:15 -0700 (PDT) Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.205.65.136 with HTTP; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 11:42:15 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20120912202932.1fc1adbb@marga.jer-c2.orkz.net> References: <1347472741.2365.5.camel@belkin4> <20120912202932.1fc1adbb@marga.jer-c2.orkz.net> Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 14:42:15 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: Sp6twbUEag_AOIjBg2igIosjDPk Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] About changing security policy to unCC maintainers when their are not needed From: Rich Freeman To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Archives-Salt: bf215a63-4047-4b9b-8471-a3683818edf2 X-Archives-Hash: 5092370d13f5894abe5d1dbccb2d5c76 On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 2:29 PM, Jeroen Roovers wrote: > > So you would want to be re-CC'd when it is time to remove the vulnerable > versions, I guess. Isn't this done shortly after keywording is complete? I think the concern is more about issuing GLSAs/etc, which apparently can happen months or years after the vulnerable versions were removed judging by recent chromium@ mail. > You can un-CC yourself. I don't see why security@ should be doing the > legwork. I see no issue with that. Rich