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 C8BCE1396D0 for ; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 19:56:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D60A02BC01C; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 19:56:38 +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 89B052BC011; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 19:56:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.100.0.22] (host-37-191-226-104.lynet.no [37.191.226.104]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: k_f) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C758234171B; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 19:56:35 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: Git workflow GLEP (Was: Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items, council meeting 8/October/2017 18:00 UTC) To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org, =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBHw7Nybnk=?= , gentoo dev announce Cc: council@gentoo.org References: <2032312.gCecMtFXeN@porto> <1506452291.25101.14.camel@gentoo.org> <1506540293.1169.2.camel@gentoo.org> <1506627995.15843.5.camel@gentoo.org> From: Kristian Fiskerstrand Message-ID: <559f083a-8d97-8a66-b917-e318227d8d33@gentoo.org> Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2017 21:56:24 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0 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 In-Reply-To: <1506627995.15843.5.camel@gentoo.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="iK4Mej7rsB8fSeoWHpaookEGij0QQEjTN" X-Archives-Salt: 90d93139-dc7a-493e-a211-eb65e0a26d86 X-Archives-Hash: 07aa882a9706084b8a61a1a8ec38bdf5 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --iK4Mej7rsB8fSeoWHpaookEGij0QQEjTN Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="7VX75Ixx8wB4wKPVtfWerLHAnlOxnMvk3"; protected-headers="v1" From: Kristian Fiskerstrand Reply-To: k_f@gentoo.org To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org, =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBHw7Nybnk=?= , gentoo dev announce Cc: council@gentoo.org Message-ID: <559f083a-8d97-8a66-b917-e318227d8d33@gentoo.org> Subject: Re: Git workflow GLEP (Was: Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items, council meeting 8/October/2017 18:00 UTC) References: <2032312.gCecMtFXeN@porto> <1506452291.25101.14.camel@gentoo.org> <1506540293.1169.2.camel@gentoo.org> <1506627995.15843.5.camel@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <1506627995.15843.5.camel@gentoo.org> --7VX75Ixx8wB4wKPVtfWerLHAnlOxnMvk3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 09/28/2017 09:46 PM, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny wrote: > W dniu czw, 28.09.2017 o godzinie 11=E2=88=B606=E2=80=89+0200, u=C5=BCy= tkownik Kristian > Fiskerstrand napisa=C5=82: >> (2)(a) Should Bug be a generic indicator for bug information, includin= g >> 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). >=20 > 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. >=20 > 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 hav= e > 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 >=20 >> If so (c) is there >> a benefit in using a full URI for Bug; or should this be reduced to on= ly >> the number, >=20 > 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. >=20 Which could also be seen as an argument for Gentoo-Bug: XXXXXX --=20 Kristian Fiskerstrand OpenPGP keyblock reachable at hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net fpr:94CB AFDD 3034 5109 5618 35AA 0B7F 8B60 E3ED FAE3 --7VX75Ixx8wB4wKPVtfWerLHAnlOxnMvk3-- --iK4Mej7rsB8fSeoWHpaookEGij0QQEjTN Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEtOrRIMf4mkrqRycHJQt6/tY3nYUFAlnNU+wACgkQJQt6/tY3 nYXZwwgAnuLKq9W4lEzL2khvW4zFc5AzFjO4lEEqG+0DsEScXqYi7gA5ixoQ7bSq TV/YL5dHp4zXFAzXGqpXGkgdRDa1AjOJcC84wvm+gQFy0kKat24nZrNbY5cZ1YyG AcDj24aVB/Uq+JfP+k8kH9JWyydOueDIPC+mkR48E3kxpVRb7BV3u9tyLWoO0Acj WPZHndyZDI00EQuuh16yziNmWxGmTzbt9IW2WDpl7628bg1W2KKWHuV6w+ipWwuT Mdjov8xyLW5K6MzseYsOK69+OoA5LsaccVQajajof3J7YjBBLD6wFcTRQhcvyrwO WFuBFQXt56ghG6oQujV3BnHWQzHRxg== =qu8z -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --iK4Mej7rsB8fSeoWHpaookEGij0QQEjTN--