Re: RFC: Security policy adjustments to make it easier to implement and more friendly to maintainers

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 02:28:30PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > Ignoring low bugs also probably isn't a viable stragegy
> > for EPEL, because that's a long life distro stream, and
> > so won't automatically get low CVE fixes via a rebase
> > in 6 months like we do in Fedora.  So the CVE mountain
> > is even bigger for EPEL, and also more serious due to its
> > long lifecycle.
> 
> Given that RHEL completely ignores low-impact security issues, I do not see 
> why EPEL should be held to a higher standard than RHEL itself.

I didn't say RHEL completely ignores them.  They are not fixed
asynchronously but we do fix them in the next regular minor release.

Rich.

-- 
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
Fedora Windows cross-compiler. Compile Windows programs, test, and
build Windows installers. Over 100 libraries supported.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MinGW
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux