[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: happy hacking welcome to tim rühsen

From: Tim Rühsen
Subject: Re: happy hacking welcome to tim rühsen
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2020 14:18:43 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.6.0

On 23.03.20 18:24, Mats Erik Andersson wrote:
> Måndag den 23:e mars 2020, klockan 14:07, skrev Tim Rühsen detta:
>> May I suggest that Alfred or Mats put the ChangeLog file into an own
>> branch and we all add commits until we are all happy ? Then we merge
>> those commits into a single one and add it to master.
>> Currently it is not clear to me who is the "owner" of that file in
>> regards of being responsible to put in all the suggestions made here.
> I disagree. First the correct changelog go into place, then other
> matters follow. I see no other matter that matters more than keeping
> a correct changelog file. We are already into deep water with the
> present situation.

I made the above suggestion to speed up on the changelog issue a bit. I
have no clue why you think that is a different matter.
I also pointed out my current blocker - you don't even care for
addressing that.

> The responsibility lies with each and every member to write a useful
> and relevant changelog entry with each prepared commit to master.
> I would have thought the large exent of our changelog file and
> my agitated outburst had made this matter clear by now.
>> Regarding mentioning a "CVE tag": Who is going to retrieve a CVE number
>> ? Or has it been done already ?
> This was not meant as a git tag in any way. My statement is simply that
> the publicly assigned CVE number should be included in our changelog and
> in the commit message that is simultaneous with the issued commit.
> This is exactly the reason why a code change and additions to ChangeLog
> have to be similtaneous, in order that matter related to public security
> tickets can be traced properly, be it via 'git blame', simple reading
> of Changelog, or amplified by diligent and informed work.

Instead of answering my questions, you start lamenting about a "git
tag". I again have no clue why you do that - I never talked about that.
I referenced your term "CVE tag" from one of your last emails.

Is it possible to answer my questions above, please. Without an
appropriate answer we are stuck.

Regards, Tim

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]