| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 01:18:25 +0200 From: Rene Herman <rene.herman@...access.nl> To: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net> CC: Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>, Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: Tracking and crediting bug reporters On 18-05-08 00:53, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 10:35:43AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote: >> [Operating in delayed response mode, sorry...] >> >> Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org> wrote: >> >>> In which format do you want data for commits already in 2.6.26? >> I hadn't thought about trying to backfill data for existing commits; >> that sounds like a fair amount of work for coverage which could still be >> somewhat spotty. If you have the data at hand, though, then a simple >> file of the form >> >> commit-id full-name <email> > > How to indicate whether it's a Reported-by or a Bisected-by? Literal Bisected-by might not make for a very good tag. Bisection is a way to pin down a bug; just one of them. So say person A reports and person B says "Hey, I know what that is. Try reverting foo." B then doesn't fit the tag while the only difference is that B was clever enough to not need a bisection. So if this is about giving credit; Tracked-down-by maybe? Something else? Rene. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists