Subject: Re: Confidential ignored? Was: (Re: bin/1996: Patch to add recursive options to grep(1))
To: None <is@Beverly.Rhein.DE>
From: J.T. Conklin <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 02/07/1996 01:23:36
> email@example.com wrote:
> : >Number: 1996
> : >Category: bin
> : >Synopsis: Patch to add recursive options to grep(1)
> : >Confidential: yes
> May I conclude from this that the Confidential line is ignored by
It's not entirely ignored... Let me explain
If I could easily remove Confidential I would. Note that the NetBSD
Project does not have any contractual obligation to keep information
send in a PR confidential. With our project, real Confidential PR's
would not get the benefit of random NetBSD users (who oftentimes
come up with the solution to reported bugs).
The reason that there is a "Confidential" field at all is simple.
Although we took the best free bug tracking system available, GNATS
isn't flexible enough when you want to break some of its designed-in
limitations. Because "Confidential" is a field the bug database is
indexed on, it's fairly difficult to remove the requirement that
We have GNATS automatically send received problem reports to the
netbsd-bugs mailing list. Since the mechanism used is designed to
mail the report to those "responsible" for working on the bug, GNATS
has no way to restrict it to non-Confidential PRs. Thus even
confidential PRs will be mailed to netbsd-bugs.
But after that point, only those people with source tree access can
retrieve confidential PRs. The email and www interfaces should not
allow confidential PRs to be read.
The above being said, I think the fact that the Confidential field
comes up on the PR form is a bug that could be fixed. If any one
wants to volunteer, please contact me. I'll work with you and the
GNATS maintainer to find a acceptable solution.