On Wed, 13 Sep 2017 22:44:23 -0400
Yury German <[email protected]> wrote:

Thank you! That's very helpful. A few clarifying questions below
to be absolutely clear.

> OK so let me repeat the comments that were made on @dev  (and expand a bit 
> further) and close the issue.
> 
> 1. Maintainers are free to cc the non-stable and experimental arches as part 
> of their call for stabilization. It is up to the maintainer of the package to 
> decide.
> 
> 2. This is providing that there is no problems caused by stableboy or extra 
> dependencies raised
> Note: as a follow up change was made: 07:47 <@kensington> leio: b-man: good 
> point, dropped sparc from stable_arches
> 
> 3. Clean up is required as part of the security bug process, and if an arch 
> is holding it up (example hppa before Slyfox took it over) an issue would 
> have to be raised with the QA team for action. [1]

'Cleanup' is only vulnerabe ebuild removal, not CC removal from the bug, right?

> 4. Bugs will be closed without waiting for any non-security supported arches, 
> once the security process is complete.

CC for exp lagging arches are not removed from the bug, right?

> 5. Security bugs are not re-assigned since they are assigned as a 
> vulnerability in bugzilla. If you need to continue work on the bug, please 
> feel free to open another bug for the particular arch for stabilization, fix, 
> etc.
> 
> If you have any questions please let me know.
> 
> 
> [1] - 
> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Security/GLSA_Coordinator_Guide#Bugs_in_.5Bcleanup.5D_status

-- 

  Sergei

Attachment: pgpXroUy2YKpe.pgp
Description: Цифровая подпись OpenPGP

Reply via email to