+1
-------- Regards, Ina Panova Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc. "Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is no path and leave a trail." On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 3:08 PM, Dennis Kliban <dkli...@redhat.com> wrote: > +1 > > On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 4:06 PM, Brian Bouterse <bbout...@redhat.com> > wrote: > >> +1 >> >> tiny grammar fix on the PR requested. Thank you for organizing this! >> >> On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 2:10 PM, David Davis <davidda...@redhat.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Thanks everyone for the feedback. I have opened a PR for PUP-7 which (if >>> approved) will require 2FA for the Pulp organization in Github: >>> >>> https://github.com/pulp/pups/pull/14 >>> >>> Feedback welcome. Also, I'd like to call for a vote by August 27, 2018. >>> Per PUP-1[0], are the voting options: >>> >>> +1: "Will benefit the project and should definitely be adopted." >>> +0: "Might benefit the project and is acceptable." >>> -0: "Might not be the right choice but is acceptable." >>> -1: "I have serious reservations that need to be thought through and >>> addressed." >>> >>> [0] https://github.com/pulp/pups/blob/master/pup-0001.md >>> >>> David >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 3:00 PM David Davis <davidda...@redhat.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> +1 to opening a PUP. Seems like that’s the best way to document the >>>> policy. I will start working on this. >>>> >>>> David >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 2:21 PM Brian Bouterse <bbout...@redhat.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> +1 to requiring it. I also already have it enabled. Would it be >>>>> possible to either (a) turn this into a short pup and call for a vote or >>>>> (b) add a date to close this email thread decision by? >>>>> >>>>> Let me know if I should help write/review any. >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Jul 28, 2018 at 6:09 AM, Tatiana Tereshchenko < >>>>> ttere...@redhat.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> +1, enabled. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 12:02 AM, Dennis Kliban <dkli...@redhat.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> +1, but I already have it enabled. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 3:53 PM, David Davis <davidda...@redhat.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I got a notification from another organization I am a member of on >>>>>>>> Github[0] that they are going to require Two Factor Authentication[1] >>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>> response to recent news about some malicious code being shipped in a >>>>>>>> compromised npm package[2]. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We are vulnerable to having malicious code deployed to PyPI if one >>>>>>>> of our Github accounts is compromised. Thus, I wonder if we should also >>>>>>>> require that people with a commit bit have Two Factor Authentication >>>>>>>> enabled. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thoughts? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [0] https://community.theforeman.org/t/require-2fa-for-githu >>>>>>>> b-organization-members/10404 >>>>>>>> [1] https://help.github.com/articles/requiring-two-factor-au >>>>>>>> thentication-in-your-organization/ >>>>>>>> [2] https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/07/12/npm_eslint/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> David >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> Pulp-dev mailing list >>>>>>>> Pulp-dev@redhat.com >>>>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Pulp-dev mailing list >>>>>>> Pulp-dev@redhat.com >>>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Pulp-dev mailing list >>>>>> Pulp-dev@redhat.com >>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pulp-dev mailing list >> Pulp-dev@redhat.com >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Pulp-dev mailing list > Pulp-dev@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev > >
_______________________________________________ Pulp-dev mailing list Pulp-dev@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
