maintainer-feedback requested: [Bug 240774] security/py-fido2: Update to 0.7.1 [patch]

Bugzilla Automation has asked freebsd-python mailing list for maintainer-feedback: Bug 240774: security/py-fido2: Update to 0.7.1 [patch] https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240774 --- Description --- All FreeBSD specific patches are upstreamed now, makes everything in "files"

[Bug 240774] security/py-fido2: Update to 0.7.1 [patch]

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240774 Bug ID: 240774 Summary: security/py-fido2: Update to 0.7.1 [patch] Product: Ports & Packages Version: Latest Hardware: Any OS: Any Status: New

[Bug 240677] graphics/py-python-poppler-qt5: Update to 0.74.0

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240677 Steve Wills changed: What|Removed |Added Status|New |Closed Resolution|---

[Bug 240677] graphics/py-python-poppler-qt5: Update to 0.74.0

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240677 --- Comment #2 from commit-h...@freebsd.org --- A commit references this bug: Author: swills Date: Mon Sep 23 20:59:05 UTC 2019 New revision: 512676 URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/512676 Log:

[Bug 240665] devel/py-robotframework-pabot: Update to 0.88

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240665 Steve Wills changed: What|Removed |Added Status|Open|Closed Resolution|---

[Bug 240665] devel/py-robotframework-pabot: Update to 0.88

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240665 --- Comment #1 from commit-h...@freebsd.org --- A commit references this bug: Author: swills Date: Mon Sep 23 21:13:52 UTC 2019 New revision: 512680 URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/512680 Log:

[Bug 240774] security/py-fido2: Update to 0.7.1

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240774 --- Comment #11 from Michael Gmelin --- (In reply to Kubilay Kocak from comment #10) Thanks for the detailed explanation. If it makes you feel better, I've never seen an organization that didn't struggle with getting this right. I've

[Bug 240774] security/py-fido2: Update to 0.7.1

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240774 --- Comment #12 from Kubilay Kocak --- (In reply to Michael Gmelin from comment #11) Totally, it's a hard problem, with context, industry, organization, product and team specific considerations, such that most just do the 'gut feel' on

[Bug 240774] security/py-fido2: Update to 0.7.1

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240774 Kubilay Kocak changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|maintainer-feedback?(python |maintainer-feedback+

[Bug 240774] security/py-fido2: Update to 0.7.1

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240774 Kubilay Kocak changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|maintainer-feedback?| Status|New

[Bug 240774] security/py-fido2: Update to 0.7.1

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240774 Kubilay Kocak changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pyt...@freebsd.org Attachment

[Bug 240774] security/py-fido2: Update to 0.7.1

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240774 --- Comment #8 from Michael Gmelin --- (In reply to Kubilay Kocak from comment #6) Ah, so basically if it's simply about updating the port for the sake of being "current", it's probably "only me". If it brings in an important feature or

[Bug 240774] security/py-fido2: Update to 0.7.1

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240774 --- Comment #3 from Michael Gmelin --- (In reply to Kubilay Kocak from comment #1) I assumed that this would happen automatically when the PR is assigned to the maintainer (as it is not: Would it be possible?) Regarding "affects some"

[Bug 240774] security/py-fido2: Update to 0.7.1

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240774 --- Comment #6 from Kubilay Kocak --- (In reply to Michael Gmelin from comment #3) It does for maintainer-feedback flag (issue level), but not for maintainer-approval (attachment flag/level), so that, the flag state (?) and the value

[Bug 240774] security/py-fido2: Update to 0.7.1

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240774 --- Comment #10 from Kubilay Kocak --- (In reply to Michael Gmelin from comment #8) And yeh, security vulnerabilities are almost always High/Many, unless the vulnerability is conditional on an option (say a port option or optional or

[Bug 240774] security/py-fido2: Update to 0.7.1

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240774 Kubilay Kocak changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #207744|maintainer-approval?(python |maintainer-approval+,

maintainer-approval requested: [Bug 240774] security/py-fido2: Update to 0.7.1 : [Attachment 207744] Update security/py-fido2 to 0.7.1

Kubilay Kocak has reassigned Michael Gmelin 's request for maintainer-approval to freebsd-python mailing list : Bug 240774: security/py-fido2: Update to 0.7.1 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240774 Attachment 207744: Update security/py-fido2 to 0.7.1

[Bug 240774] security/py-fido2: Update to 0.7.1

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240774 Kubilay Kocak changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|Affects Some People |Affects Only Me

[Bug 240774] security/py-fido2: Update to 0.7.1

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240774 --- Comment #4 from commit-h...@freebsd.org --- A commit references this bug: Author: grembo Date: Tue Sep 24 02:34:30 UTC 2019 New revision: 512694 URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/512694 Log: Update to 0.7.1 PR:

[Bug 240774] security/py-fido2: Update to 0.7.1

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240774 --- Comment #9 from Kubilay Kocak --- (In reply to Michael Gmelin from comment #8) Yep. Though to be clearer/more precise, its worth noting: - The default Bugzilla field name is 'Severity', one of the two fields, the other 'Priority',