W. Trevor King

Rebased onto master with fa72f6b now that #29 has landed.

The PullApprove failure is [because][1] we [don't have a `selinux-maintainers` group on this repo][2]. [1]: https://pullapprove.com/opencontainers/project-template/pull-request/31/requirements/ [2]: https://github.com/opencontainers/project-template/pull/29#issuecomment-287407307

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 02:07:35PM -0700, Chris Aniszczyk wrote: > @wking it's been renamed: > https://github.com/orgs/opencontainers/teams/selinux-maintainers That page 404s for me (probably because it needs some admin-ish permissions),...

I recommend batching this with #18 for an all-maintainer vote.

Bump. Over 300 days since this was filed, and working security-issue links seem like something we'll want for the [new distribution-spec project][1]. [1]: https://github.com/opencontainers/tob/pull/35/files#diff-748aea9c83a752af811a80671d8803d2R41

This, like #34, falls into the "trivial broken link" category.

On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 11:33:06AM -0700, Vincent Batts wrote: > actually no, that is like LGTM'ing your own PR, which we disallow. > Rejected We have a much...

On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 12:17:09PM -0700, Tianon Gravi wrote: > As I mentioned on the list, I'd rather the proposer's acceptance be > implied unless they state otherwise....

On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 12:33:31PM -0700, Tianon Gravi wrote: > … I just think that the situations in which someone would propose > something they actually disagree with...

On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 12:59:48PM -0700, Vincent Batts wrote: > Might as well say "unless sponsor explicitly REJECT" rather than or LGTM, > but it doesn't break any...