Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> On 2015-07-06 20:25:25 +0200 (+0200), Henry Gessau wrote:
>> Jeremy, a huge thanks for this fantastic reply! I have taken the liberty of
>> copying your responses directly into Neutron's "contributing" guide:
>> https://review.openstack.org/187267
>>
>> I hope you don't mind
On 2015-07-06 20:25:25 +0200 (+0200), Henry Gessau wrote:
> Jeremy, a huge thanks for this fantastic reply! I have taken the liberty of
> copying your responses directly into Neutron's "contributing" guide:
> https://review.openstack.org/187267
>
> I hope you don't mind.
Quite the opposite--I'm h
Jeremy, a huge thanks for this fantastic reply! I have taken the liberty of
copying your responses directly into Neutron's "contributing" guide:
https://review.openstack.org/187267
I hope you don't mind.
On Fri, Jul 03, 2015, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> On 2015-07-03 22:01:38 +0200 (+0200), Henry Ge
On 2015-07-03 22:01:38 +0200 (+0200), Henry Gessau wrote:
[...]
> The question now arises about what to do when a security issue is
> found in such an external repository that integrates with Neutron.
>
> - How should such security issues be managed?
The OpenStack Vulnerability Management Team (
In the Liberty cycle Neutron is mandating the splitting out of "third-party"
plugins and drivers into separate repositories, see [1]. These external
repositories will be managed by the maintainers of the code, who are
independent from the neutron core maintainers.
The question now arises about wha
