Commit 0ba49fe
doc: remove problematic example from README
Remove Buffer constructor example from security reporting examples. Even
though the example text focuses on API compatibility, the pull request
cited is about zero-filling vs. not zero-filling, which is not an API
compatibility change (or at least is not unambiguously one). The fact
that it's a pull request is also problematic, since it's not reporting a
security issue but instead proposing a way to address one that has
already been reported publicly. Finally, the text focuses on the fact
that it was not deemed worth of backporting, but that was determined by
a vote by a divided CTC. It is unreasonable to ask someone reporting an
issue to make a determination that the CTC/TSC is divided on.
In short, it's not a good example for the list it is in. Remove it.
Refs: #23759 (comment)
PR-URL: #23817
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <michael_dawson@ca.ibm.com>
Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <targos@protonmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Trivikram Kamat <trivikr.dev@gmail.com>1 parent d808d27 commit 0ba49feCopy full SHA for 0ba49fe
File tree
Expand file treeCollapse file tree
1 file changed
+0
-6
lines changedOpen diff view settings
Filter options
Expand file treeCollapse file tree
1 file changed
+0
-6
lines changedOpen diff view settings
Collapse file
-6Lines changed: 0 additions & 6 deletions
- Display the source diff
- Display the rich diff
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| ||
179 | 179 | |
180 | 180 | |
181 | 181 | |
182 | | - |
183 | | - |
184 | | - |
185 | | - |
186 | | - |
187 | | - |
188 | 182 | |
189 | 183 | |
190 | 184 | |
|
0 commit comments