On 10/13/2017 03:00 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Fri, 2017-10-13 at 14:53 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: >> It's really hard to say what the trouble >> is... are there to few of them? Overtasked with other work? Workflow too >> difficult? > > AFAIK it's basically just lvrabec at the moment, and I think the 'map' > permission issues that showed up this cycle may have been keeping him > pretty busy. Not sure if there are other factors involved. The workflow is pretty unclear too...at least to me. Like there are never any new releases anymore and just large patches against that release... rawhide has 3.13.1-295 ! and -rw-rw-r--. 1 kevin kevin 1685866 Oct 13 15:54 policy-rawhide-base.patch -rw-rw-r--. 1 kevin kevin 3664459 Oct 13 15:54 policy-rawhide-contrib.patch If you want to do a PR what do you do here? > It seems like there's sort of been an idea floating around for a while > that we should be trying to move SELinux policies out of the > centralized selinux-policy package - e.g. the Apache-relevant policies > should move into the httpd package, and so on - but I don't know any > details about how serious / achievable that idea is. It *is* possible > for packages to ship their own SELinux policies now, though, and some > (not many) do. Yeah, this idea is already true with epel now. It used to be RHEL selinux folks would add in policy for epel packages, but they now will not and require them to be in the package itself. At least they have said so in bugs, without much in the way of any formal announcement. kevin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
