1. Attendance
- Jeremy Mitchell
- Stephen Hamrick
- Zach Hoffman
- Rawlin Peters
- Taylor Frey
- Dandy Pham
2. Do we need 6.0.2? There's a milestone, and an issue with the
Riak-to-Postgres TV migration tool
- 6.0.2 is coming
- Add stuff to the milestone if you want it backported
- There's also a fix to remove an unused dependency from the TO RPM
- 6.0.2 needs a t3c fix to alleviate an upgrade incompatibility
with the unstable TO API it uses
3. ML: Making Use of GitHub Triage Role
- Allows people to close/re-open issues, add milestones/labels to
things, etc.
- Follow-up to occur on the ML
4. ML: LDAP CVE Announcement
- Security guidelines for CVE reporting and handling are confusing.
5. tech debt issue grooming
- #6319 - added "medium" label
- #6266 - added "medium" label
- #6249 - No action, sparked a spin-off discussion
a. Should we have priority labels?
- It's simpler and more open to instead add
level-of-effort labels which can be used by contributors to determine
priority.
On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 9:15 AM Zach Hoffman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Mailing list threads from the past few weeks:
> - ATC 6.0.1 and 5.1.4 are released
> - CVE-2021-43350: Apache Traffic Control: LDAP filter injection
> vulnerability in Traffic Ops
> - Making Use of GitHub Triage role
>
> On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 9:14 AM Jeremy Mitchell <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Are we planning a 6.0.2? This seems like a good fix to ensure the
> > successful migration from riak to the postgres traffic vault:
> > https://github.com/apache/trafficcontrol/pull/6353
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 9:04 AM Jeremy Mitchell <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I'd like to try to assign a severity level (critical, major, medium,
> > > minor) to our tech debt issues:
> > >
> > https://github.com/apache/trafficcontrol/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3A%22tech+debt%22
> > >
> > > On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 9:40 AM ocket 8888 <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > >> If you have anything you want to discuss at next week's meeting, respond
> > >> to
> > >> this email and it's on the agenda
> > >>
> > >
> >
