From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AA21E1396D0 for ; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 20:18:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 960ED2BC013; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 20:17:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 26C4B2BC011; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 20:17:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pomiot (d202-252.icpnet.pl [109.173.202.252]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mgorny) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8E20D341728; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 20:17:56 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <1506629873.15843.7.camel@gentoo.org> Subject: Re: Git workflow GLEP (Was: Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items, council meeting 8/October/2017 18:00 UTC) From: =?UTF-8?Q?Micha=C5=82_G=C3=B3rny?= To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org, gentoo dev announce Cc: council@gentoo.org Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2017 22:17:53 +0200 In-Reply-To: <559f083a-8d97-8a66-b917-e318227d8d33@gentoo.org> References: <2032312.gCecMtFXeN@porto> <1506452291.25101.14.camel@gentoo.org> <1506540293.1169.2.camel@gentoo.org> <1506627995.15843.5.camel@gentoo.org> <559f083a-8d97-8a66-b917-e318227d8d33@gentoo.org> Organization: Gentoo Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.24.5 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: b3be53f9-c64b-4b8e-9781-95d6906cb0d4 X-Archives-Hash: 26ae7b619c9695e05c8d048cba1c4756 W dniu czw, 28.09.2017 o godzinie 21∶56 +0200, użytkownik Kristian Fiskerstrand napisał: > On 09/28/2017 09:46 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > > W dniu czw, 28.09.2017 o godzinie 11∶06 +0200, użytkownik Kristian > > Fiskerstrand napisał: > > > (2)(a) Should Bug be a generic indicator for bug information, including > > > upstream bugs, or; (b) do we want to separate upstream / other > > > information in e.g a References: field that can be used for other bugs > > > and descriptions (including security advisories etc). > > > > As far as I'm concerned, one indicator for all bugs is enough, > > especially that in some cases projects have Gentoo upstream which blur > > the line between upstream and downstream bugs. > > > > As for CVEs and other uncommon stuff, I don't have a strong opinion. If > > you expect some specific machine action for them, it'd be better to have > > a unique tag though. > > I'm actually thinking more of link to things like advisories and > mailing list discussions with a Reference tag in this case, which can > also be used along with e.g a URI to e.g a debian bugtracker for same > issue if picking a patch etc > > > > > > If so (c) is there > > > a benefit in using a full URI for Bug; or should this be reduced to only > > > the number, > > > > Only full URIs are acceptable. Numbers are ambiguous. The repository > > and commits within it are mirrored to various sources, can be included > > in external repositories and so on. We don't want to start closing > > accidental bugs all over the place just because someone cherry-picked > > a commit without escaping all references Gentoo developers left. > > > > Which could also be seen as an argument for Gentoo-Bug: XXXXXX > And then Gentoo-Closes, Debian-Closes, Fancybuntu-Closes, My-Fun- Upstream-Tracker-Bug... -- Best regards, Michał Górny