One of the things I noticed is, if we make
https://scan.coverity.com/projects/gluster-glusterfs as the source of truth
for coverity issues, then the issue IDs will be constant. We can reference
them.
Also note that we should most probably focusing on 'High Impact' issues
first for sure, than the m
On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 9:25 AM, Atin Mukherjee wrote:
>
> On Fri, 3 Nov 2017 at 18:31, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY
> wrote:
>
>> On 11/02/2017 10:19 AM, Atin Mukherjee wrote:
>> > While I appreciate the folks to contribute lot of coverity fixes over
>> > last few days, I have an observation for some of th
On Fri, 3 Nov 2017 at 18:31, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote:
> On 11/02/2017 10:19 AM, Atin Mukherjee wrote:
> > While I appreciate the folks to contribute lot of coverity fixes over
> > last few days, I have an observation for some of the patches the
> > coverity issue id(s) are *not* mentioned which g
On 11/02/2017 10:19 AM, Atin Mukherjee wrote:
> While I appreciate the folks to contribute lot of coverity fixes over
> last few days, I have an observation for some of the patches the
> coverity issue id(s) are *not* mentioned which gets maintainers in a
> difficult situation to understand the exa
While I appreciate the folks to contribute lot of coverity fixes over last
few days, I have an observation for some of the patches the coverity issue
id(s) are *not* mentioned which gets maintainers in a difficult situation
to understand the exact complaint coming out of the coverity. From my past
