On 7/8/19 15:31, Stephen Farrell wrote: > > Hiya, > > On 07/08/2019 13:06, Fernando Gont wrote: >> It is not that the reporter is >> telling you "review your spec, there is a bug, and i won't tell you >> why", but normally the problematic text is quoted, and a solution proposed. > > I suggest you select a bunch of unprocessed errata (without > cherry picking:-) and record how long it takes you to write > 'em up so that an AD could quickly read your email and then > hit approve or hfdu or whatever. Not sure what you mean. Are you arguing that the errata are usually poorly written/submitted? That they are hard to process anyway? Something else? > I'd be interested in the > time it takes you to do 10 or 20 of those. And I'd not be > surprised if ADs were happy if you wanted to volunteer to > do that periodically. Doesn't the same analogy apply to processing vulnerability reports? And continuing with the analogy, would it be fine to just leave the bugs there because they take time to patch? Cheers, -- Fernando Gont SI6 Networks e-mail: fgont@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
