You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
AIUI we currently run coverity on master and send the results to the security group. Given that it seems to turn up useful things (most recently #13050 (comment)) we should probably run it on PRs as well.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
gibfahn
added
build
Issues and PRs related to build files or the CI.
c++
Issues and PRs that require attention from people who are familiar with C++.
labels
May 19, 2017
If that’s feasible, I see no reason not to? I guess the reason to only send it to the security working group is that it might show up bugs relevant to security, but if we catch those problems even before they enter master, that’s no longer an issue.
I did some digging through old emails. It looks like @rvagg and @jbergstroem set up the Coverity account. It also looks like Coverity is an external service that can take up to 48 hours to send back a report. Unless this has changed since 2015, we may not be able to run it on every PR, although I agree it would be nice to be able to.
It seems like perhaps this should be closed (based on @cjihrig's comment above). Feel free to re-open (or leave a comment requesting that it be re-opened) if you disagree. I'm just tidying up and not acting on a super-strong opinion or anything like that.
AIUI we currently run coverity on master and send the results to the security group. Given that it seems to turn up useful things (most recently #13050 (comment)) we should probably run it on PRs as well.
Thoughts?
cc/ @sam-github @cjihrig
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: