Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Clarify which parts of a multi-component project are in scope #46

Open
bureado opened this issue Jan 11, 2022 · 0 comments
Open

Clarify which parts of a multi-component project are in scope #46

bureado opened this issue Jan 11, 2022 · 0 comments

Comments

@bureado
Copy link

bureado commented Jan 11, 2022

In the spreadsheet, there is a column for a URL. Most of the ~100 rows have a link to a GitHub repository, with notable exceptions including the Linux kernel, golang, gnupg and git which have a pointer to the homepages (and sigstore, but I think that's an omission)

Does that mean that only the code in those repositories is in scope as critical? What happens if a project splits the "critical to trust" functionality across two or more repositories in the same organization?

For example, for ceph, it sounds like ceph/ceph is in scope, but ceph/ceph-ansible is not. Is that by design? Another example, one project under the powershell organization is powershell/openssh-portable. Is that in scope? And another one is puppetlabs/puppet, would puppetlabs/facter be in scope?

I'm sure there's been a discussion on this somewhere, the comments in the spreadsheet point to this question, and in some cases like Signal, apache and mysql, the links point to the entire organization. I think it would be helpful to have a 1:n relationship between named project and "components of interest", described for example via a normalized name/identifier for the "friendly" project name (1:) and purls for the SCM or other generic release pointers (:n)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant