Hi Casey, On Wed, 2006-02-01 at 13:00 -0800, Casey Marshall wrote: > It's just that crypto/ssl is a large part of > Classpath now, so it makes sense that it have it's own component (and > bugs!). You got it! There is a new 'crypto' component for the 'classpath' product now with you as default owner. But feel free to reassign any bugs reported against it to others after initial analysis. > > And maybe a "security" keyword that describes > > direct security issues? > > > > For security right now we have a meta-bug which depends on all the > > security issues -- PR 13603. This is a bit weird since this > > predates classpath using bugzilla, and is filed against gcj. > > > > I don't know the pros and cons of meta-bugs versus keywords. I'm > > fine with whatever works. Maybe Andrew (one of the gcc bug-masters) can advise us on when to add a new keyword and when to use meta-bugs. How do other projects handle security issues/bug reports in their issue trackers? Cheers, Mark -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://developer.classpath.org/pipermail/classpath/attachments/20060202/c38130ea/attachment.pgp
