On Mon, 2023-06-19 at 18:01 -0400, JT wrote: > In the original post, I took private to mean its own dedicated list... not that it'd be hidden > from view from everyone. IMHO everything with Fedora should be in the open. Bugs should be > reported upstream, so I dont see why there would need to be any confidential information dealt > with by the SIG. > Security exploits for upstream applications shouldnt be dealt with upstream and not here with a > Fedora SIG. There's no reason for exploit discussion of that nature unless its something Fedora > has introduced, at which point it's relevant and should be public so users can be aware and > address/mitigate any potential threat. > JT > Hi, I agree. Regards Phil -- *** Playing the game for the games own sake. *** Associations: * Debian Maintainer (DM) * Fedora/EPEL Maintainer. * Contributor member of the AlmaLinux foundation. WWW: https://kathenas.org Buy Me a Coffee: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/kathenasorg Twitter: @kathenasorg Instagram: @kathenasorg IRC: kathenas GPG: 724AA9B52F024C8B
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ 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 Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
