[Dev] Code synchronization: smack, smack-privilege-config, libprivilege-control, security-server.

Demeter, Michael michael.demeter at intel.com
Tue Oct 8 00:11:57 GMT 2013


Please look at the current libsmack in tizen.

Jarkko and I worked to get the repo up to date with upstream and still
carry the Samsung changes ( that should be removed in the future ) as a
patch on top of upstream...

Michael
On Oct 4, 2013 11:15 AM, "Schaufler, Casey" <casey.schaufler at intel.com>
wrote:

>  ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* dev-bounces at lists.tizen.org [mailto:dev-bounces at lists.tizen.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Bartlomiej Grzelewski
> *Sent:* Friday, October 04, 2013 3:15 AM
> *To:* dev at lists.tizen.org
> *Subject:* [Dev] Code synchronization: smack, smack-privilege-config,
> libprivilege-control, security-server.****
>
> ** **
>
> Dear all,****
>
> Due to problem with platform build I was asked to move commits(all of them
> were reviewed by Samsung engineers) from review.tizendev.org into
> review.tizen.org. This is the list of repositories that should be
> actualized:****
>
> * platform/core/security/security-server (106 commits to move)****
>
> ** **
>
> The disposition of security-server for Tizen 3 has yet to be determined.
> The Intel security team is advocating that it be removed. It will certainly
> require significant change in the face of multiuser support if it is
> retained.****
>
> ** **
>
> * platform/core/security/libprivilege-control (110 commits to move)****
>
> ** **
>
> The Intel and Samsung security teams will need to talk about this one as
> well. The 32,000 rule model is something we don’t want to propagate into
> Tizen 3.****
>
> ** **
>
> * platform/upstream/smack (21 comits to move. all of them must be
> cherry-picked because tizendev does not contains upstream history)****
>
> ** **
>
> Please assure me that these are **not** the same libsmack changes that
> have been rejected upstream. They will **not** be accepted for Tizen 3. **
> **
>
> ** **
>
> * framework/security/smack-privilege-config (2 commits)****
>
> ** **
>
> This package has not been introduced to Tizen 3 yet. There is no tizen
> branch.****
>
> ** **
>
> I would like to push commits for smack and smack-privilege-config through
> gerrit. Who should be added as reviewer?****
>
> ** **
>
> I believe that number of commits for security-server and
> libprivilege-config is too big to push them through gerrit. The history on
> tizendev and tizen is almost identical (usually tizen branch on tizen.orgcontains 6 or 7 additional commits at the top of history). If you don’t
> have any objections I would like to rebase all commits from tizen.org to
> base from tizendev (branch master) and push it directly to tizen branch
> with force option.****
>
> ** **
>
> We don’t do this anymore.****
>
> ** **
>
> If you have objection I will be force to use cherry-pick. Should I push
> all the commits through gerrit(who should be added as reviewer?) or push it
> directly to the git repository?****
>
> ** **
>
> Clearly the Intel and Samsung security teams need to be coordinating
> better on how we’re moving forward on Tizen 3. Making changes that we know
> we’re planning to revert is a bad idea.****
>
> ** **
>
> Best regards,****
>
> Bartlomiej Grzelewski****
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list
> Dev at lists.tizen.org
> https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.tizen.org/pipermail/dev/attachments/20131007/2159d1ea/attachment.html>


More information about the Dev mailing list