Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] note git-security@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx in more places

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

 



On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 09:52:55PM +0100, Thomas Gummerer wrote:
> Add a mention of the security mailing list to the README, and to
> Documentation/SubmittingPatches..  2caa7b8d27 ("git manpage: note
> git-security@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx", 2018-03-08) already added it to the
> man page, but for developers either the README, or the documentation
> on how to contribute (SubmittingPatches) may be the first place to
> look.
> 
> Use the same wording as we already have on the git-scm.com website and
> in the man page for the README, while the wording is adjusted in
> SubmittingPatches to match the surrounding document better.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  Documentation/SubmittingPatches | 13 +++++++++++++
>  README.md                       |  3 +++
>  2 files changed, 16 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
> index 27553128f5..c8f9deb391 100644
> --- a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
> +++ b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
> @@ -176,6 +176,12 @@ that is fine, but please mark it as such.
>  [[send-patches]]
>  === Sending your patches.
>  
> +:security-ml: footnoteref:[security-ml,The Git Security mailing list: git-security@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> +
> +Before sending any patches, please note that patches that may be
> +security relevant should be submitted privately to the Git Security
> +mailing list{security-ml}, instead of the public mailing list.
> +
>  Learn to use format-patch and send-email if possible.  These commands
>  are optimized for the workflow of sending patches, avoiding many ways
>  your existing e-mail client that is optimized for "multipart/*" mime
> @@ -259,6 +265,13 @@ patch, format it as "multipart/signed", not a text/plain message
>  that starts with `-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----`.  That is
>  not a text/plain, it's something else.
>  
> +:security-ml-ref: footnoteref:[security-ml]

My only feedback here is that using the footnoteref syntax to refer to
the previous footnote potentially makes this a little less readable for
plain text users, although it also reduces duplication.  I'm not sure I
feel strongly one way or the other on this.

Otherwise, this looked fine to me.
-- 
brian m. carlson: Houston, Texas, US
OpenPGP: https://keybase.io/bk2204

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux