Source Mage code commit list

[Jeremy Blosser <jblosser-smgl AT firinn.org>]

On Jan 02, Jaka Kranjc [lynx AT mages.ath.cx] wrote:
> On Tuesday 02 January 2007 11:47, Ladislav Hagara wrote:
> > It is great you integrate security fixes and resolve integration bugs.
> > Thanks for it.
> > On the other side there are next SECURITY_PATCHes in test grimoire.
> > For example (not only) firefox. The last version is 1.5.0.9 with
> > SECURITY_PATCH=6.
> > You just update firefox in stable to 1.5.0.5.
> > I would prefer something like "p4 integ test/firefox/...
> > stable/firefox/...".
> > The same with wireshark, gnupg, gnupg-exp, openssh, ...
> > Some "security" script compared SECURITY_PATCHes in test with stable-rc
> > and stable and integrate could be fine. :-)
> Yeah, I know there is newer stuff available, but I'm only the integrator, I 
> don't have the mandate to decide what can go to stable or stable-rc. So 
> file 
> bugs and get gatekeepers to approve them.
> 
> Maybe we should indeed have a simpler process for integrating security 
> fixes, 
> everybody can see that we don't take good care of them now.

Yes, we probably need a script that does a nightly check that:

1) there is no spell in test with a SECURITY_PATCH value higher than the
   same spell in current stable/-rc
2) there is no spell with a new SECURITY_PATCH that is integrated to stable
   but not in the tarball

I discovered when I did a new stable-0.4 tarball yesterday that there were
openssl security patches that were integrated back in September but never
in the tarball, and there is still an openssl security patch in master that
hasn't even been integrated to stable.  :-(  This is horrid, but given our
available resources, probably not unexpected.  We need automation for this.

Does someone have resources to put this together?  I don't know where the
output should go necessarily... maybe we need a gatekeeper-prodding ML or
something.

Attachment: pgpnPsrJmkWnW.pgp
Description: PGP signature