[Secure-testing-team] DTSA advisory format

[Joey Hess]

Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> Does one of the other scripts depend on this behaviour? Adding it to the
> front is rather ugly inplace editing, while adding it the end is a plain
> append operation. Or does anyone know a pythonesque workaround?

No, nothing depends on ordering, it's just what we expect. Buffer file,
write new, write buffer. :-)

> That was used as a workaround, because the descriptional date in the
> advisory differs from the one in data/DTSA/list. Let's add the date
> in ISO format (i.e 2005-08-11) into the .adv file, then I'll transform
> it into the proper formats. It the date entry in data/DTSA/list used
> besides statistical evaluation?

No, we could just as well remove that date field. Although I might use
the one in DSA/list if I ever fix the page to have links to DSAs, since
you have to know the year of a DSA to link to it on the Debian web site.

> I guess that can't be avoided, as some advisories will require more time
> than others. Security team works this way as well.

There are ways to avoid it, but I don't know if they're worth it. OTOH,
I cannot remember the security team ever sending DSAs out of order.

-- 
see shy jo
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/secure-testing-team/attachments/20050828/67d1cfbf/attachment.pgp