On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 12:08:18PM +1000, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-07-17 at 10:32 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>
> > may "non-critical" or "non-urgent" ?
>
> I think I would go with non-urgent.
>
> Perhaps it should also mention point releases?
Yeah, it should point to the general proce
On Mon, 2017-07-17 at 10:32 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> may "non-critical" or "non-urgent" ?
I think I would go with non-urgent.
Perhaps it should also mention point releases?
--
bye,
pabs
https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message par
Hi,
On Wed, 12 Jul 2017, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 6:51 AM, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> > The PTS shows no-dsa security issues as "Ignored security issue",
> Do you have an example of a package where this shows up?
https://tracker.debian.org/xmlsec1
> > But showing them as ignor
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 6:51 AM, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> The PTS shows no-dsa security issues as "Ignored security issue",
Do you have an example of a package where this shows up?
> But showing them as ignored is wrong and misleading.
What wording to replace the current template would you s
Package: tracker.debian.org
Severity: normal
The PTS shows no-dsa security issues as "Ignored security issue",
but that's wrong: They are not ignored per se, it only means they
don't warrant an immediate DSA. They can stable through a point
release or they're lined up, they can be piggybacked on a
5 matches
Mail list logo
