summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/wiki/src/blueprint/GitLab.mdwn
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorintrigeri <intrigeri@boum.org>2019-12-26 18:36:25 +0000
committerintrigeri <intrigeri@boum.org>2019-12-26 18:36:25 +0000
commit49a62720ff88c1f0c52fb14a9ff1551b8b733f88 (patch)
treedd83e41d0ccf6770383ba5d0607cca8edfec3a82 /wiki/src/blueprint/GitLab.mdwn
parent7ed8c61099c27a04df84b28f1e961e64e07e8e2e (diff)
GitLab: TODO--
A month later: - Everybody agreed, except one person whom I don't expect a reply from. - We realized that Redmine already leaks "the fact that someone (unspecified) posted a private note on an issue", so the question was actually only about the timestamp.
Diffstat (limited to 'wiki/src/blueprint/GitLab.mdwn')
-rw-r--r--wiki/src/blueprint/GitLab.mdwn16
1 files changed, 2 insertions, 14 deletions
diff --git a/wiki/src/blueprint/GitLab.mdwn b/wiki/src/blueprint/GitLab.mdwn
index 85f4e7d..417d083 100644
--- a/wiki/src/blueprint/GitLab.mdwn
+++ b/wiki/src/blueprint/GitLab.mdwn
@@ -471,20 +471,8 @@ Tails community.
It looks like GitLab does not support private comments.
- XXX (intrigeri): check if it's OK to publicly leak the fact that
- someone (unspecified) posted a private note on an issue, along with
- the corresponding timestamp. To list all private notes, grouped by
- user:
-
- ./redlab discuss --verbose -C config.py --private-notes
-
- - 2019-11-20: asked the 10 affected users if they consent with leaking
- this information publicly.
-
- If folks don't consent to this infoleak, we'll add a link from the
- GitLab issue description to the privately archived Redmine, and to
- follow an old discussion, one may want to systematically follow this
- link to ensure they did not miss a private note.
+ It's OK to publicly leak the fact that someone (unspecified) posted
+ a private note on an issue, along with the corresponding timestamp.
* Preserve issue assignee