Re: security-tracker: A proposal to significantly reduce reported false-positives (no affected-code shipped)

Hello Salvatore,

On Sat, 2 Nov 2024 at 20:02, Samuel Henrique <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Oct 2024 at 19:43, Salvatore Bonaccorso <[email protected]> wrote:
> > As mentioned in an earlier message: What I would love to see is to
> > actually have a substate which makes the situation clear, and still
> > beeing technically correct. I was envisioning something which would be
> > a substate like we have for the substate of no-dsa (ignored,
> > postponed).
>
> This sounds like the solution proposal A2, quoting it:
> > ## A2) Add a new mutually exclusive state to the set:
> "not-affected-build-artifacts"
>
> Would this be aligned to what you're looking for?

Could you check if the suggestion above addresses your concern?

Cheers,


--
Samuel Henrique <samueloph>