Hi Sylvian, I have just tested the patch and it really produces much more packages to be triaged and they are really reasonable!
I would propose to merge it into the master branch and start to use it. Thanks for that! Anton Am Mi., 20. Apr. 2022 um 20:54 Uhr schrieb Sylvain Beucler <b...@beuc.net>: > Hi Anton, > > There's no need for a MR for this short lts-specific patch, and I > believe this list has better visibility for the LTS team than the > security-tracker salsa project (where lts-cve-triage.py resides). > > Cheers! > Sylvain > > On 20/04/2022 18:09, Anton Gladky wrote: > > Hi Sylvian, > > > > thanks for your work! Could you please create a merge request, > > so we can discuss this nice improvement there? > > > > Regards > > > > Am Mi., 20. Apr. 2022 um 17:33 Uhr schrieb Sylvain Beucler > > <b...@beuc.net <mailto:b...@beuc.net>>: > > > > Now with the patch. > > > > On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 05:08:20PM +0200, Sylvain Beucler wrote: > > > During my last front-desk week I noticed that we tend to miss or > > delay > > > some buster security updates, in particular those that come in > point > > > releases, and a few batches of minor postponed fixes. See for > > > instance, 'dpdk' [1] or 'mailman' [2]. > > > > > > Attached is a patch to 'bin/lts-cve-triage.py' to help exhibit > those > > > updates so we schedule them in dla-needed.txt. This includes > fixes > > > from stable/oldstable point releases or past DSAs, but excludes > > issues > > > explicitly ignored, and old fixes from back when buster was > unstable. > > > > > > The current output is manageable (40-50 packages), and I plan to > trim > > > it further down by properly tagging <ignored> some no-dsa issues > that > > > are not meant to be fixed in stretch (see e.g. 'ark' [3]), and > > tagging > > > <end-of-life> a few others (e.g. 'node-*'). > > > > > > At this point front-desk can proceed as usual using the enhanced > > > 'lts-cve-triage.py' output. Front-desk may need to use 'no-dsa' > > > sparingly in the future, in favor of its 'postponed' and 'ignored' > > > sub-states [4], so as to better help the tool. > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > Cheers! > > > Sylvain Beucler > > > Debian LTS Team > > > > > > [1] > > https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/dpdk > > <https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/dpdk> > > > [2] > > https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/mailman > > <https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/mailman> > > > [3] > > https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/ark > > <https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/ark> > > > [4] > > > https://security-team.debian.org/security_tracker.html#issues-not-warranting-a-security-advisory > > < > https://security-team.debian.org/security_tracker.html#issues-not-warranting-a-security-advisory > > > >
