Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 3 Jul 2023 21:35:11 +0200
From:   Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        security@kernel.org, corbet@lwn.net, workflows@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Documentation: security-bugs.rst: clarify CVE
 handling
Message-ID: <ZKMi78OUCL2N5OQB@1wt.eu>
References: <2023063020-throat-pantyhose-f110@gregkh>
 <2023063022-retouch-kerosene-7e4a@gregkh>
 <202306301114.E199B136@keescook>
 <2023070213-capacity-moneybags-3668@gregkh>
 <ZKJJoK4kyOCEYcOR@1wt.eu>
 <2023070335-groggily-catfish-9ad5@gregkh>
 <202307031131.51907BC65@keescook>
 <2023070329-mangy-dipping-2ebd@gregkh>
 <202307031217.95B8803@keescook>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <202307031217.95B8803@keescook>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 12:26:32PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> I still think this version of the sentence is more readable:
> 
> However under no circumstances will patch publication be delayed for
> CVE identifier assignment.
> 
> "patch inclusion" is less clear to me that "publication", and "be
> delayed to wait for" is redundant: a delay is a wait, and "to arrive"
> is just the assignment, which is the subject of the paragraph, so better
> to keep the language for that consistent.

I agree, I find it better as well :-)

Thanks,
Willy