[Fedora-infrastructure-list] Re: coverity code checker in Extras

[Jesse Keating]

On Thu, 2006-08-31 at 16:20 -0400, Dan Williams wrote:
> 
> Note that we may not be able to deploy the Coverity bits on the same
> build machines that Extras packages are built on right now; 

I would hope that the infrastructure team would balk on putting any
proprietary software on the build systems anyway.  That's a sure fire
way to cause undiagnosable issues and to prevent moving forward with the
OS installs.  Also there is the security concern.  We don't want un
audited bits of software being part of our build process.  Sure coverity
could say we audited our own software, but still....  Call it the
paranoia in me, but I certainly wouldn't want it on my build systems,
and I don't think internally at Red Hat we'll (release engineering) be
to keen on putting it in OUR build system either.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/infrastructure/attachments/20060903/a3bde00d/attachment.bin